i 

W  1 


wm 


UN 

INFIDELITY; 

ITS  ASPECTS,  CAUSES,  AND  AGENCIES, 


BY   THR      ^ 

KEV.  THOMAS  -PEARSON, 


EYEMOUTH,    N.B. 


PENSANTUR    TRUTINA. — Horace. 

O  ce  TTOiuii'  n)y  a\i]deiav  ep-^erai  irpoQ  to  (pivg.  —  The  Master. 


CHEAP  EDITION, 
FROM  THE  FORTIETH  LONDON  EDniON. 


NEW  YORK : 

ROBERT  CARTER  AND  BROTHERS. 

1854. 


THIS  ESSAY 


IS  EESPECTFULLY  DEDICATED  TO  THE 


EVANGELICAL  ALLIANCE 


BY  THE  AUTHOR. 


CONTENTS. 


Page 
Introduction 

PART  THE  FIRST. 

Infidelity  in  its  Various  Aspects  

Chap.  I.    Atheism;  or,  the  Denial  of  the  Divine  Existence  ..         ..        6 

II.    Pantheism;  or,  the  Denial  of  the  Divine  Personality   ..         ..       23 

III.  Naturalism;  or,  the  Denial  of  the  Divine  Providential  Govern- 

ment       48 

IV.  Spiritualism ;  or,  the  Denial  of  the  Bible  Kedemption  . .         . .       88 
V.    Indifferentism;  or,  the  Denial  of  Man's  Eesponsibility  ..     136 

VI.    Formalism;  or,  the  Denial  of  the  Power  of  Godliness..         ..     156 


PART  THE  SECOND. 

Intidelity  in  its  Various  Causes 173 

Chap.  I.     General  Cause ib. 

II.     Speculative  Philosophy ,         182 

III.     Social  Disaffection           199 

IV.    The  Corruptions  of  Christianity        209 

V.    Relifjious  Intolerance 222 

VI.    Disunion  of  the  Church           237 


PART  THE  THIRD. 

Infidelity  in  its  Various  Agencies        2.^1 

Ch4P.  I.    The  Press 252 

n.    The  Clubs 273 

in.    The  Schools           286 

V.    The  Pulpit 300 

Appendix 315 


INTEODUCTION. 


The  answer  given  by  tlie  messengers  to  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
that  stood  among  the  myrtle  trees,  in  the  vision  of  Zechariah  the 
projDhet,  does  not  apply  to  our  times  :  "  We  have  walked  to  and 
fro  through  the  earth,  and  behold  all  the  earth  sitteth  still  and  is 
at  rest."  Politically  and  morally,  in  the  sphere  of  things  sacred 
and  in  the  sphere  of  things  civil,  Europe,  in  the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  is  a  troubled  sea.  Numerous  and  mighty 
agencies  both  for  good  and  evil,  are  abroad  and  at  work.  These 
agencies  may  embody  the  same  great  principles  that  liave  been 
opposing  and  struggling  with  each  other  from  the  beginning. 
Light  and  darkness  strove  (in  tho  face  of  the  deep  before  this 
goodly  universe  rose  out  of  chaos,  and  they  have  their  strivings 
still.  Error  is  not  of  yesterday  any  more  than  truth.  They 
encountered  each  other  in  Paradise,  they  have  had  many  en- 
counters since,  and  they  are  yet  in  the  field.  But  periods  arise 
which  become  exalted  into  epochs,  when  these  ancient  forces,  on 
the  one  side  or  on  both,  display  more  than  usual  vigour,  appear  in 
new  or  revived  forms,  change  their  modes  of  attack  and  defence, 
and  come  off  with  honours.  Such  a  period  was  the  beginning  of 
the  Gospel,  when  truth  in  her  fairest  form  descended  from  heaven, 
sustained  the  combined  attack  of  all  the  powers  of  evil,  and  by 
her  own  inherent  vigour  spoiled  principalities  and  powers  and 
went  on  conquering  and  to  conquer.  Sucl?  a  period  was  the  dark 
or  middle  ages,  which,  like  a  long  and  dreary  night,  succeeded  a 
short  but  bright  day,  when  it  seemed  as  if  truth  had  been  driven 
from  the  field,  and  the  world  had  been  given  up  to  the  reign  of 
ignorance  and  error.  Such  a  period  was  the  Reformation  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  which,  with  a  voice  whose  sound  was  like  the 
sea,  awoVe  Europe  from  the  sleep  of  ages,  mustered  in  fierce  and 


2  IXTIIODUCTION. 

vigorous  conflict  all  the  powers  of  good  and  evil,  and  sent  through 
out  the  heart  of  ransomed  humanity  a  thrill  of  joyous  liberty  that 
has  echoed  over  the  earth  and  down  the  stream  of  time.  Such  a 
l^eriod,  (to  contract  our  view  within  our  own  England),  was  that 
august  and  earnest  century  when  an  oppressed  people  rose  up, 
resolute  and  majestic,  against  their  faithless  oppressors — when  the 
Puritans  sounded  the  Gospel  trumpet  against  the  formalism  and 
irreligion  of  the  age,  and  men  awoke  at  once  to  civil  freedom,  and 
that  yet  higher  liberty  wherewith  the  truth  makes  men  free.  And 
— to  leap  over  the  bridge  that  spanned  the  dark  and  boisterous 
waters  that  rolled  between,  one  of  those  dreary  intervals  that  ever 
and  anon  occur  in  history,  and  which  constituted  in  itself  a  dark 
age,  when  the  foe  was  permitted  to  advance  and  stretch  his  sceptre 
over  the  church  and  the  world,  and,  in  a  great  measure,  corrupt 
the  form  and  stifle  the  voice  of  truth  itself,  —  such  a  period  was 
the  latter  half  of  the  last  century,  when  an  awakening  evangelism, 
big  and  feeling-hearted,  counteracted  the  materialistic  tendencies 
which  a  sceptical  soulless  philosophy  had  given  to  the  age,  and 
blew  upon  the  cold  earthly  morality  that  had  usui-ped  the  place  of 
the  Gospel  in  the  college  chair  and  in  the  church  pulpit. 

The  fruits  of  this  latter  age,  fruits  both  good  and  evil,  we  are 
now  reaping.  There  is  more  reason,  however,  to  be  thankful  for 
its  legacy  of  good,  than  to  deplore  the  inheritance  of  its  evil.  Its 
shining  light  has  shined  more  and  more  unto  our  own  day,  b:it 
masses  of  dark  cloud  envious  and  poi'tentous  have  followed  it. 
We  are  not  so  moodishly  disposed  as  to  call  to  remembrance  the 
former  days  and  say  they  were  better  than  the  present.  No,  the 
age  carrying  along  with  it  maich  of  the  rich  good  of  the  past,  is, 
in  spite  of  many  drawbacks,  advancing  onward  in  the  right  path. 
There  is  in  the  heart  of  humanity  a  much  larger  amount  of  the 
leaven  of  heavenly  truth  than  could  be  found  at  any  preceding 
period,  and,  notwithstanding  all  opposing  tendencies,  it  is  spread- 
ing and  will  spread.  Despotism,  which  robs  man  of  his  rights  and 
obstructs  the  progress  of  God's  truth,  is  losing  its  gi-ound,  and 
truth  and  freedom  are  advancing.  The  Bible,  the  schoolmaster, 
the  evangelist,  and  the  missionary,  are  abroad.  The  church  at 
home  is  becoming  more^and  more  alive  to  the  call  of  her  Lord, 
'  arise,  shine,'  —  her  voice  is  becoming  more  loud   and  earnest 


INTRODUCTION.  o 

in  tlio  pulpit,  her  instruction  agencies  among  our  Lome  popula- 
tion are  strengthening  and  thickly  multiplying,  and  she  is  lengthen 
ino-  her  cords  so  as  to  emhrace  within  her  pale  the  abundance  of 
the  sea  and  the  forces  of  the  Gentiles.  But  if  it  is  unwise  to 
brood  over  the.  maladies  of  an  age  as  if  it  were  only  evil  and  that 
continually,  it  is  not  less  so  to  glory  in  its  fair  forms  and  healthy 
activities  as  if  oblivious  of  its  wounds  and  bruises  and  putrifying 
sores.  The  sun  is  in  the  heavens  bright  and  beaming,  but  the 
clouds  have  gathered  surcharged  with  the  elements  of  strife,  and 
they  are  ever  and  anon  darkening  and  troubling  the  sky.  Our  age 
is  one  of  intense  earnestness  and  action  both  for  good  and  evil. 
The  old  truth  and  the  old  error  which  have  struggled  throughout 
the  past,  are  in  the  field.  But  neither  is  slumbering,  both  are  vigi- 
lant, extending  their  lines,  increasing  their  forces,  devising  and 
adopting  new  modes  of  defence  and  attack,  as  if  conscious  that  a 
blow  was  about  to  be  struck  which  would  mark  another  gi-eat  era 
in  the  conflict  between  the  powers  of  good  and  evil. 

There  are  giants  on  the  earth  in  these  days  both  in  the  one 
encampment  and  in  the  other.  A  mighty  force  is  on  the  side  of 
the  friends  of  truth,  but  it  is  sadly  divided  and  scattered.  What 
is  wanting  is  the  strength  of  union,  the  concentration  of  those 
energies  in  defending  the  citadel  and  making  inroads  on  the 
enemy,  which  are  spent  on  the  defence  of  comparatively  unim- 
portant posts,  or  in  one  detachment  of  the  same  corps  guarding 
against  the  encroachment  of  another.  The  champions  of  error, 
though  not  without  their  discords  and  divisions,  are  yet  wiser  in 
their  generation  than  the  children  of  light.  As  of  old  they  discern 
the  signs  of  the  times,  and  take  counsel  togetlier  against  the  Lord 
and  against  his  anointed.  The  Press,  to  which  under  God  we  owe 
so  much  of  our  light  and  liberties,  wields  a  mighty  influence  on 
the  side  of  evil.  The  halls  of  pliilosophy,  hallowed  though  they 
be  by  many  a  name  illustrious  for  Christian  worth  as  well  as  intel- 
lectual greatness,  are  often  sending  forth  doctrines  as  gross  as  the 
earth  or  as  vague  as  the  air,  but  alike  adverse  to  that  truth  which, 
coming  from  above,  is  above  all.  Our  current  literature  and  works 
on  science,  with  not  a  few  bright  and  beneficent  exceptions,  arc 
hostile  either  by  their  silence  in  reference  to  divine  truth  when 
their  subjects  afford  them  occasions  to  speak  out,  or  by  their 

b2 


4  INTEODUCTION. 

avowed  opposition  to  much  of  what  constitntcs  the  essence  of  true 
religion.  And  what  is  peculiar  in  a  great  measure  to  our  times, 
and  throws  a  vast  potency  into  the  scale  of  irreligion,  is  the  un- 
ceasing effort  of  infidels  to  diifuse  their  principles  among  the 
artizans  and  lahouring  classes  of  the  land.  The  earth  is  not  still 
and  at  rest.  Men  of  every  class  are  searching  after  an  unknown 
good.  The  demon  of  infidelity  is  stalking  abroad,  knocking  at  the 
l)alaces  of  the  rich  and  the  cottages  of  the  j)oor,«  transforming 
itself  into  this  shape  and  that,  and  becoming  all  things,  except  an 
angel  of  good,  to  all  men.  One  dreary  theory  succeeds  another,  like 
storm-cloud  chasing  storm-cloud  over  the  face  of  the  sky,  and  yet 
man  is  not  at  peace.  The  cravings  of  his  mind  ai-e  agonized, 
not  satisfied.  It  becomes  those  then  who  know  the  truth  and 
whom  the  truth  has  made  free,  those  who  having  believed  do  enter 
into  rest,  to  arouse  themselves  for  the  two-fold  object  of  meeting 
infidelity  at  its  various  points  and  combatting  its  diversified  formg, 
and  of  presenting  in  every  lawful  way  that  truth  which  they  know 
only  can  give  rest  to  a  labouring  and  heavy-laden  world.  Let  the 
antagonist  forces  on  the  one  side  as  well  as  on  the  other  be  pressed 
into  the  unfettered  conflict,  and  the  lovers  of  God  and  the  friends 
of  man  have  nothmg  to  fear  but  much  to  hope.  "Christianity, 
like  Rome,  has  had  both  the  Gaul  and  Hannibal  at  her  gates  :  but 
as  the  'Eternal  City,'  in  the  latter  case,  calmly  offered  for  sale,  and 
sold,  at  an  undepreciated  price,  the  very  ground  on  which  the 
Carthaginian  had  fixed  his  camp,  with  equal  calmness  may  Chris- 
tianity imitate  her  example  of  magnanimity.  She  may  feel 
assured  that,  as  in  so  many  past  instances  of  premature  triumpli, 
on  the  part  of  her  enemies,  the  gi-ound  they  occu2iy  will  one  day 
be  her  own;  that  the  very  discoveries,  apparently  hostile,  of 
science  and  philosophy,  will  be  ultimately  found  elements  of  her 
sirengtlK"!  "  All  fiesli  is  as  grass,  and  all  the  glory  of  man  as  the 
flower  of  grass.  Tlie  grass  withereth,  and  the  flower  thereof 
hiUetli  av/ay.     But  the  word  of  the  Lord  endin-eth  for  ever." 

* "  Aequo  pulsat  pedc  panperum  taljenins 

l{(^gumque  tuiros.'" — Jloracn. 

+  Rogers'  Essays,  vol.  ii.p.  315. 


PAPtT  THE  FIEST. 


ATHEISM PANTHEISM NATURALISM PSEUDO-SPIRITUALISM — - 

INDIFFERENTISM  —  FORMALISM. 

Infidelity,  tlioug-h  elaborating  its  own  creed,  is,  properly  s^Dealduo-, 
a  system  of  negations.  It  suggests  rather  what  it  seeks  to  demolish 
than  what  it  attempts  to  biuld.  In  this  respect  it  is  like  the 
])almer-worm  of  the  prophet,  ^i'  the  mere  mention  of  which  leads 
one  to  think  more  of  what  it  has  destroyed,  than  of  what  it  has 
left  to  be  eaten  by  the  locust.  But  in  the  work  of  demolition,  one 
man  or  class  of  men  advances  farther  than  another.  Some  sacred 
truths  wliicli  one  band  of  fell  destroyers  clear  away  in  their  march, 
another  band,  leagued  in  the  same  warfare,  leave  standing.  Just  as 
we  may  suppose  some  of  the  soldiers  of  Csesar,  in  attacldngthe  Mas- 
siliau  grove,  went  scrupulously  and  sparingly  to  work  from  a  super- 
stitious dread  of  invisible  power,  while  others,  less  timid  and  super- 
stitious, levelled  to  the  ground  everything  that  had  for  ages  been 
counted  sacred,  j-  Infidelit}'  in  one  age  or  country  may  be  much  more 
sweeping  than  in  another,  and,  as  every  body  knows,  contempora 
neous  systems  of  unbelief  among  the  same  people  may  differ 
wddely  in  the  number  of  things  sacred  which  they  proscribe.  But 
there  is  a  clearly  defined  body  of  religious  truth,  in  reverencing 
which,  people  and  nations  who  have  had  and  fairly  used  the  means 
of  judging,  liowever  much  differing  on  other  points,  have  gene>rally 
been  agreed.  This  is  the  ark  of  the  God  of  Israel ;  and  however 
the  Philistines  may  outstrip  each  other  in  laying  hands  upon  it, 
they  are  yet  to  be  numbered  under  one  genus,  on  the  principle 
that  depredators  are  but  depredators,  though  some  may  be  braver 
and  more  successful  in  the  work  of  plunder  than  others.  This 
body  of  truth  comprises  all  the  commonly  understood  doctrines  of 
natural  and  revealed  religion  :  such  as  the  independent  existence 
of  one  absolutely  perfect  Being,  the  Creator,  Preserver,  and 
Governor  of  all  things ;  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  or  of  three 
Persons  in  the  Godhead,  the  Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Spirit; 
the  Incarnation  and  Atoiement  of  the  Son  for  human  salvation; 
and  the  necessity  of  the  Spiiit's  influences  to  regenerate  the  souls 

*  Joel  i.  i  +  Fostcv'a  Zsstiys,  p.  30,  loth  ed. 


0  atheism;  oe, 

of  men.  This  is  God's  truth,  tlie  substance  of  all  that  material 
nature  teaches,  the  purest  reason  has  ever  been  able  to  discover, 
and  the  Scriptures  have  revealed.  There  is  room  for  a  diversity 
of  opinion  about  modes  of  ecclesiastical  government,  external 
I'ites  and  ceremonies,  and  the  interpretation  of  certain  Scriptural 
passages,  but  no  one  who  has  ears  to  hear,  and  who  humbly  listens 
to  the  voices  of  nature  and  revelation,  can  fail  to  discover  what 
God  is,  and  wliat  he  has  done,  what  man  is,  and  what  he  needs. 
Infidelity,  then,  is  found  to  manifest  itself  in  such  forms  as  tlie 
following :  in  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Existence,  or  absolute 
Atheism ;  in  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Personality,  or  Pantheism  ; 
in  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Providential  Government,  or  Natural- 
ism; in  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Redemption  (including,  as  it 
does,  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  Atonem^ent,  and  Spirit's  influ- 
ences), or  Pseudo-Spiritualism.  And  to  these  may  be  added,  what 
belongs  more  properly  to  practical,  than  to  theoretical  infidelity, 
the  denial  of  IMan's  responsibility,  or  indifierentism ;  and  the  denial 
of  the  Power  of  Godliness,  or  Formalism.  These  forms  we  shall 
now  develop. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE    DENIAL   OF   THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE,   OE  ATHEISM. 

Albeism  completes  tlie  negation  —  A  somewhat  strange  phenomenon — Its  exist- 
ence doubted — No  man  of  straw  —  Processes  by  which  men  have  become 
atheists  —  Prevalent  in  most  depraved  times  —  French  atheism  —  Eeign  of 
Terror  —  Anatheistical  nation  self-destructive — No  lack  of  adverse  speculations 
respecting  the  Divine  Being,but  absolute  atheism  comparatively  rare — Develop- 
ment hypothesis  not  positively  atheistical  —  Atheism,  however,  a  fact — Involves 
a  monstrous  assumption — The  existence  of  God  an  intellectual  necessity  — 
Ai-f^umentH  a  priori  and  a  ])osteriorl  —  EiLchisi\e  claim  for  either  disposed  of — 
Inductive  proof  from  matter  and  mind — Defect  of  induction — Bible  testimony 
— Practical  Proof  the  real  one — Dr.  Ai-nold. 

Here  the  negation  is  complete.  The  work  of  demolishing  things 
esteemed  sacred,  has  advanced  so  far  as  to  leave  nothing  more  for 
the  destroyer  to  do.  He  has  reached  the  dreary  brink  from  which 
many  destroyers,  by  no  means  craven-hearted,  have  shrunk  back. 
And  from  that  bad  pre-eminence  he  looks  upwards  to  the  heavens, 
vacant  at  first  in  his  wishes,  and  now  in  his  creed,  and  with  as 
much  boliiness  as  if  he  had  travelled  through  the  realms  of  space 
and  beheld  all  dark  and  desolate,  says,  Tliere  is  there  no  God.  He 
looks  down  to  the  gulf  of  annihilation,  and,  amid  the  troubles  of 
his  godless  existence,  feels  something  like  a  morbid  satisfaction  in 
the  thought  that  the  grave  is  an  eternal  sleep  and  the  present 
scene  the  whole  of  man.  He  looks  abroad  upon  the  mass  of 
human  society,  ill  at  ease  and  yearning  after  an  enjoyment  that  it 
l:as  never  found,  and  to  the  question,  "Who  will  shew  us  any 
good?"  he  has  only  one  answer,  "Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to- 


THE    DENIAL    OF    THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE.  7 

against  the  aspirings  of  his  better  self,  to  rest  in  the  dark  dogma 
that  the  highest  being  is  man. 

Atheism  in  this  im qualified  sense  is,  it  must  be  admitted,  a 
somewhat  strange  and  startling  phenomenon.  People  in  many- 
parts  would  turn  out  and  look  at  a  real  and  avowed  atheist,  just 
as  they  do  at  some  singularly  huge  foreign  animals,  with  mingled 
astonishuient  and  alarm.  Faith  in  God  is  so  inherent  in  the  heart 
of  humanity,  and  so  essential  to  our  reason,  that  many  wise 
and  good  men  have  doubted  if  ever  there  lived  an  intelligent 
mortal  so  absolutely  destitute  of  religious  belief  as  is  implied  in 
atheism.,  Addison  would  have  told  a  man  vv'ho  gloried  in  this 
distinction,  that  he  was  an  impudent  liar,  and  that  he  knew  it. 
Bacon  accounted  atheism  to  be  rather  in  the  lip  than  in  the  heart, 
and  that  a  contemplative  atheist  is  a  prodigy,  a  thing  unusually 
rare.  "  I  confess,"  says  Dr.  Arnold  in  one  of  his  weighty  letters, 
"  that  I  believe  conscientious  atheism  not  to  exist."  And  it  does 
appear  an  incredible  thing,  that  a  man  possessed  of  intelligence 
and  feeling,  standing  amid  this  glorious  amphitheatre  of  earth 
and  sky,  gazing  upon  its  grand  and  lovely  forms,  and  listening  to 
its  thousand  voices  of  rapturous  praise,  can  coolly  deny  the  existence 
of  Him  who  sits  enthroned  above  the  heavens.  It  does  seem  hard 
to  be  beheved  that  one  of  oin-  race  can  retire  into  the  depths  of  his 
OAvn  inner  nature,  and  familiarize  himself  with  the  wondrous  phe- 
nomena of  liis  mental  existence,  and  yet  come  out  of  himself  and 
unhesitatingly  say  that  this  great  system  of  animate  and  inanimate 
being  is  without  a  presiding  and  independent'mind.  It  does  look 
like  a  very  prodigious  thing  in  the  world  that  men  should  be  found 
who  not  only  rob  God  of  the  attributes  that  are  essential  to  his 
nature,  and  extrude  Him  fi-om  the  domain  of  his  own  creation,  but 
can  frame  and  assent  to  the  proposition  that  God  is  not.  But 
such  prodigies  have  been  and  ai'e  ever  and  anon  'recurring. 
Every  one  indeed  is  not  an  atheist  who  wishes  to  be  so.  And 
many  who  would  fain  persuade  the  world  that  they  are  heroes  of 
this  description,  are  no  more  to  be  credited  than  the  coward  who, 
in  the  absence  of  the  foe,  boasts  of  his  bravery.  But  absolute 
atheism  is  no  man  of  straw  that  controversialists  have  set  up  in 
order  that  they  might  knock  him  down.  It  is  an  embodied  breath- 
ing reality.  And  however  much  violence  may  be  implied  in  free- 
ing the  mind  of  a  belief  in  God,  in  thwarting  and  representing 
those  moral  instincts  which  naturally  go  out  thither  and  rest  in 
that  faith,  and  in  falsifying  all  the  signs  palpably  marked  on  the 
shining  heavens  and  the  green  earth,  which  have  spoken  from  the 
beginning  to  the  philosopher  and  the  peasant  of  a  supreme  pre- 
siding intelligence,  the  violence  in  not  a  few  instances  has  been 
done.^ 

In  'some  minds  of  a  philosophic  cast  the  work  has  proceeded 
with  something  like  system  and  deliberation.     From  one  or  two 


8  atheism;  oe, 

principles,  wliicli  in  their  fondness  they  no  more  thought  cf 
doubting  than  axioms  in  mathematics,  tliey  have  wrought  out, 
through  a  series  of  inevitable  developments,  an  independent  uni- 
verse, governed  exclusively  by  mechanical  laws,  the  lawgiver  being 
fate  or  necessity,  or  some  otlier  equally  vague  and  unintelligible 
name.  In  other  minds  less  accustomed  to  scale  the  heavens  and 
traverse  the  fields  of  space,  the  consummation  has  been  reached 
by  a  felt  necessity  of  advancing  after  having  thrown  off'  religious 
restraints;  just  as  some  people  ar«  necessitated  to  do  a  second 
wrong  action  because  they  have  done  the  first,  to  do  a  third 
because  they  have  done  the  second,  and  so  on  until  the  character 
.for  daring  has  been  stereotyped  into  something  like  the  shape  of 
an  indomitable  hero.  And  never  but  in  the  whirlpool  of  revolu- 
tionary frenzy,  or  in  such  circinnstances  as  to  be  at  once  the  cause 
3,nd  effect  of  the  corruption  of  a  state,  has  atheism  been  boldly 
adopted  and  acted  upon  by  the  masses  of  a  nation.  A  Diagoras, 
a  Bion,  and  a  Lucian,  are  marked  out  from  among  the  minds  of 
the  ancient  world  as  having  made  this  unenviable  attainment. 
The  men  of  Athens  were  wont  to  banish  from  their  city  the  soli- 
tary sceptic  that  now  and  then  appeared,  and  dared  even  to 
doubt  the  existence  of  a  supreme  intelhgence.  Ancient  Eome, 
we  know,  had  passed  the  climax  of  her  glory  before  atheism 
obtained  any  hold  of  the  public  mind,  and  its  prevalence  was 
followed  by  such  a  course  of  degeneracy,  oppression,  and  blood- 
shed, as  makes  the  reader  of  her  history  even  now  tremble;  the 
age  of  Pericles  among  the  Greeks,  and  the  age  of  Augustus  among 
the  Romans  had  departed,  and  in  the  deluge  of  depravity  that  in 
either  case  set  in  the  monster  abounded.  But  never  was  atheism, 
whether  of  a  philosophical  or  political  kind,  more  boldly  mani- 
fested than  in  the  history  of  modern  Europe.  During  the  latter 
half  of  the  last  century,  \he  religious  world  had  to  contend  not 
only  with  a  stnpid  deism  but  with  the  abettors  of  an  undisguised 
atheism.  The  very  first  principle  of  natural  religion  was  avowedly 
rejected  and  stoutly  contended  for.  Sensationalism  reached  its 
culminating  point.  The  materialistic  school  of  France  sent  forth 
an  infidel  science  and  literature  of  the  broadest  stamp,  and  that 
school  had  its  disciples  in  many  lands  In  the  "  Systeme  de  la 
Nature,"  the  celebrated  work  of  Baron  d'Holbach,  the  most  abso- 
lute atheism  is  asserted  as  openly  as  the  existence  of  God  is 
maintained  in  any  of  our  treatises  on  natural  theology.  "The 
grand  object  of  the  book,"  to  use  the  language  of  Lord  Brougham, 
"  being  to  show  that  there  is  no  God,  the  author  begins  by  endea- 
Toiuing  to  establish  the  most  rigorous  materialism,  by  trying  to 
show  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  mind  —  nothing  beyond  or 
different  from  the  material  world."=:=  This  work,  full  tliough  it  be 
of  gratuitous  assumptions  and  inconclusive  reasoning,  wa's  well 

*  Discourse  of  Natural  TbcolofeT,  p.  172. 


THE    DENIAL    OF    THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE.  -> 

fitted    as  Dr.  Chalmers  spealiiug  from  liis  own  experience  once 
remarked,  "by  its  gorgeous  generalizations  on  natm-e  and  triitli 
and  the  universe,  to  make  tremendous  impression  on  the  unpi;ac^ 
tised  reader."^=     The  French   Encyclopaedia  of  sciences    which 
numbered  amoug  its   contributors   some   of  the   most  biilh^^^^^^ 
writers  of  the  ag?,  was  avowedly  a  work  of  atheism.     Matter  and 
its  laws  became  the  engrossing    subiects   ot  investigation,  the 
existence  of  God  was  treated  as  the  fiction  of  an  overcredulous 
ao-e  and  man  was  regarded  as  but  an  organised  ammal  the  otl- 
spring  of  chance,  the  sport  of  fate,  aud  whose  end  is  annihilation 
The  Sreat  work  of  Auguste  Comte,  which  has  obtained  lor  him  a 
wide  reputation,  is  the  most  celebrated  of  the  recent  proauctions 
of  the  same  school.     It  is  a  system  of  huge  matenalism,  whicu 
"records  the  dread  sentiment,  that  the  universe  displays  no  proois 
of  an  all-directing  mind,  and  records  it  too  as  t^^  deduc  ion  o 
unbiassed  reason."     Newton,  Kepler,  and  others  of  the  gieatest 
discoverers  in  science,  have  risen  from  nature  up  to  natures  God, 
and  had  their  minds  filled  with  religious  emotion  when  exploring 
the  earth  aud  the  heavens,  but  the  disciples  of  the  school  to  wh  ch 
we  have  referred,   biilliant  though  their  4-eputation  be  in  the 
departmeuts  of  physical  research,  have   presented  to  the  world 
productions  of  their  genius  which  must  l.ear  the  broad  brand  of 

""^  What  has  been  too  truly  called  the  Eeign  of  Terror,  in  France, 
was  avowedly  the  reign  of  the  most  absohite  atheism.  InHdelity 
then  assumed  its  boldest  front  and  lifted  up  its  loudest  voice,  and 
it  found  an  echo  in  some  paits  of  our  own  land.  1  frf^liy  con- 
fess that  I  am  an  atheist,"  said  one  of  the  members  of  the  irencl 
convention  in  a  deliberative  assembly  of  his  countrymeii;  and 
thoucrh  the  declaration  startled  multitudes  by  its  darmg,  yet  voices 
were'not  wanting  in  that  asseuibly  to  cry  out,  '' \ou  arean  honest 
man  "  The  Revolutionary  leaders,  in  the  height  ot  their  impiety, 
not  only  sought  to  destroy  every  vestige  of  Christianity  by  abo- 
lishing the  sabbath,  altering  the  calendar,  plundering  and  shutting 
im  01^  converting  into  warehouses,  the  various  churches;  but  in 
the  climax  of  their  guilt,  they  brought  the  convention  to  yield  o 
the  crv,  that  the  era  had  come  when  men  should  cease  to  feai  the 
Eternal,  and,  in  the  person  of  a  strumpet,  enthroned  with  heathen 
or-ies  the  goddess  of  Reason  as  tlie  object  of  national  worsnp. 
Fiance  thus  presented  to  the  world  the  singular  and  appal  mg 
spectacle  of  a  refined  and  civilized  nation  openly  declarmg  tha 
thei-e  is  no  God.  proscribing  all  the  acts  of  religious  homage,  and 

nscribm^  on  thieutrance  to  the  sepulchre  tuat  deatli  is  an  e  en 
sleep.     "This,"   as   Robert  Hall  remarks,  ';  is  the  first  attempt 
which  has  ever  been  witnessed,  on  an  extensive  scale,  to  establish 

the  principles  of  atheism;  the  first  eff-ort  whicli  history  has  recorded 
*  Hannas  Life  of  Chalmers,  vol. i.  p.  43. 


10  atheism;  or, 

to  disannul  and  extingiiisli  the  belief  of  all  superior  powers."  It 
had  been  a  matter  of  dispute  in  former  ages  whether  a  community 
leavened  throughout  with  atheistical  principles  could  possibly  sub- 
sist. No  great  powers  of  reasoning  were  requisite  to  show  that, 
abstractedly  considered,  the  thing  is  impossible.  It  is  not  necessaiy 
to  see  the  ocean  shifting  its  bed  or  rapidly  advancing  beyond  its 
ancient  limits,  to  feel  persuaded  that  were  it  to  do  so,  it  would  carry 
a  sweeping  devastation  into  the  towns  and  villages  that  skirt 
the  shore.  Let  the  throne  in  the  heavens  be  declared  vacant,  and 
proclamation  be  made  throughout  the  land  that  there  is  no  God, 
and  society  is  reft  of  all  its  safeguards,  crime  is  committed  without 
dread  of  punishment,  and  the  vilest  passions  of  the  vilest  men 
rush  onward  without  restraint.  For  how  utterly  feeble  is  the 
check  imposed  by  human  laws  when,  by  denying  the  Divine 
existence,  they  have  succeeded  in  exploding  the  law  of  God. 
But  the  bad  pre-eminence  was  reserved  for  modern  France,  to 
teach  in  a  palpable  form  the  awful  lesson,  that  when  the  Euler 
among  the  nations  is  openly  disowned,  the  foundations  of  tlie 
earth  are  out  of  course,  the  bonds  of  society  are  dissolved,  human 
life  is  accounted  cheap  and  wantonly  sacrificed,  and  the  most 
horrid  deeds  are  perpetrated  imder  the  sacred  name  of  libert3^  It 
was  "  a  grand  experiment  on  human  nature."  Atheism  had 
never  been  tried  on  such  an  extensive  scale  before.  And  it  was 
seen  and  felt  that  nations,  like  individuals,  cannot  be  prosperous 
and  safe,  enjoy  liberty  and  be  at  peace,  without  acknowledging  the 
living  and  tiiie  God.  France  was  like  a  troubled  sea,  a  sea  of 
blood,  under  the  reign  of  atheism.  The  people  at  last  recoiled 
from  the  impious  and  horrid  system.  And  that  same  convention 
which  had  publicly  disowned  the  Most  Fligh  and  proclaimed  death 
to  be  an  eternal  sleep,  was  constrained  to  recognise  by  enactment 
the  existence  of  God  and  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and,  by  an 
impious  festival,  professedly  to  restore  the  Eternal  to  the  nation's 
faith  and  homage.  "  Vengeance  belongeth  luito  me,  I  will  recom- 
pense, saith  the  Lord."  "  The  republic  of  these  men  without  a 
God,"  remarks  Lamartine,  "  was  quickly  stranded."  Europe  has 
never  witnessed  the  reign  of  such  a  bold  and  undisguised  atheism 
since,  and  in  all  probability  never  will. 

Infidel  opinions,  monstrous  and  many-shaped  enough,  are  ever 
and  anon  thrown  up  amid  the  heavings  of  restless  humanity,  the 
natural  tendency  of  which  is  to  lead  men  to  look  up  to  a  vacant 
heaven  and  down  to  the  dreary  gulf,  from  which,  however,  they 
instinctively  shrink  back,  and  of  such  opinions  no  age  was, 
perhaps,  ever  more  rife  than  our  own.  Views  of  a  Supreme 
Power,  of  human  nature,  and  of  the  material  world,  are  emanating 
from  the  schools  and  being  diffused  throughout  the  mass  of  society, 
which  are  unquestionably  atheistical  in  tlieir  leanings.  But  there 
is  no  broad  surface  of  humanity  on  which  we  can  look  and  sjty, 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE.  11 

tliere  is  atheism  absolute  and  undisguised.  Infidelity  and  atheism 
are  not  convertible  terms.  Atheism  is  the  worst  form,  the  ulti- 
mate bound  of  infidelity,  but  all  infidelity  is  not  atheism.  The 
one  is,  comparatively,  a  strange  phenomenon,  the  other  is  ever 
floating  in  innumerable  shapes  on  the  surface  of  society  as  well  as 
pervading,  like  leaven,  the  mass.  Men  in  general  will  vvorship. 
They  are  naturally  led  to  recognise  a  Supreme  Being,  even  though 
he  may  possess  in  their  imaginings  none  of  the  attributes  and 
characteristics  of  the  God  of  the  Bible.  We  would  in  nov/ise  be 
indulgent  to  the  many  adverse  specidations  respecting  the  Divine 
Being  which  are  afloat  in  their  subtle  and  philosophic  form,  or 
which  are  popidarized  so  as  to  meet  the  capacities  of  the  multi- 
tude, speculations  which  are  dishonouring  to  God  and  virtually 
deny  Him.  But  we  woidd  distiugidsh  between  the  man  who 
believes  in  the  existence  of  a  great  First  Cause,  though  holding 
opinions  that  rob  Him  of  his  glory,  and  the  man  who  openly 
avows  that  there  is  no  God,  and  denounces  the  belief  in  Him  as  a 
mere  chimera  of  the  understanding.  A  hypothesis  may  be  athe- 
istical in  its  bearings  and  yet  its  assertor  may  be  no  theoretical 
atheist.  His  theism,  dissociated  from  other  important  beliefs, 
may  be  of  no  moral  worth  whatever,  and  in  the  scriptural  sense  of 
the  expression  he  maybe  without  God  in  the  world,  yet  so  long  as 
positive  atheism  is  not  involved  in  his  philosophical  creed,  and  he 
professes  to  have  faith  in  God,  it  were  unjust  to  place  him  at  the 
bound  which  he  had  not  yet  reached,  and  wTite  him  down  atheist. 
Mr.  Hugh  Miller  justly  remarks  of  the  development  hypothesis  of 
Maillet  and  Lamarck,  that  there  is  no  positive  atheism  involved 
in  it.  "  God  might  as  certainly  have  originated  the  species  by  a 
law  of  development,  as  he  maintains  it  by  a  law  of  development ; 
the  existence  of  a  first  great  Cause  is  as  perfectly  compatible  with 
the  one  scheme  as  witli  the  other."  =:<  If  it  were  a  question  of 
moral  influence,  and  not  of  dogmatical  opinion,  we  might  merge 
such  sim})le  theism  in  atheism,  for,  as  the  author  of  the  "  Foot- 
prints" observes,  "  without  a  belief  in  the  immortality  and  respon- 
sibility of  man,  and  in  the  scheme  of  salvation  by  a  Mediator  and 
Redeemer,  a  belief  in  the  existence  of  a  God  is  of  as  little  etJtical 
value  as  a  beUef  in  the  existence  of  the  great  sea-serpent."  But 
it  is  with  men's  creed,  not  their  practice,  that  we  have  at  present 
to  do.  And  men  may  be  living  without  God  in  the  world,  and 
yet  hold  that  there  is  a  God  in  the  heavens.  It  is  the  man  who 
disowns  God,  who  theoretically  and  practically  denies  his  exist- 
ence, that  bears  on  his  brow  the  self-inflicted  brand,  "  I  am  an 
atheist."  Our  own  age  does  not  lack  such  daring  mortals ;  they 
may  be  found  here  and  there  in  the  schools,  and  in  the  workshops, 
wielding  the  press,  or  spouting  from  the  rostrum,  or  taking  up  the 
gauntlet  on  the  platform,  but,  in  general,  the  mass  of  society 

*  rootprints  of  the  Creator,  p.  14. 


12  ATHEISM  ;    OK, 

which  is  not  Christian  is  infidel  ratlier  than  atheistical.  Com- 
paratively few  are  so  foolhardy  as  to  maintain  that  there  is  no 
God,  though  vast  multitudes  are  foolhardy  enough  to  deprive  Him 
of  all  His  distinguishing  glory  while  professing  to  acknowledge 
liis  existence.  Atlieism,  however,  is  a  fact  in  human  society,  and 
more  or  less  prevalent  in  every  age,  and  must  be  numbered  as  one 
and  the  grossest  of  the  forms  of  infidelity.-;^ 

In  atheism  the  negation  of  infidelity  is  complete.  Now,  before 
noticing  the  positive  proof  for  the  existence  of  God,  there  is  an 
initial  consideration,  of  some  importance  to  the  argument,  which 
must  be  adverted  to.  We  allude  to  the  immense  knowledge 
requisite  in  certain  cases  to  establish  a  negative.  Evidence  may 
be  adduced  at  once  to  show  that  such  a  thing  is  or  that  such  a 
thing  has  been  done,  while  the  negation  of  this  may  demand  a 
surprising  amount  of  research  and  experience.  An  individual,  for 
example,  cast  upon  what  seemed  to  be  a  desert  island,  might 
affirm  that  it  was,  or  lately  had  been,  inhabited,  and  in  proof  of 
this  he  would  need  only  to  point  to  the  human  footprint  on  the 
sand.  One  such  mark  would  of  itself  be  sufficient  to  make  good 
the  affirmation.  But  v/ere  the  companion  of  his  misfortune  to 
contend  that  the  island  was  uninhabited,  and  that  no  traces  of  a 
human  being  having  ever  been  there  could  be  found,  it  is  very 
obvious  that  the  proof  of  this  negative  assertion  would  be  attended 
with  much  greater  difficulty.  In  the  one  case,  the  single  human 
footmark  fresh  upon  the  soil  would  be  proof  sufficient.  In  the 
other  case,  it  would  be  necessary  to  explore  the  whole  region,  to 
examine  carefully  every  cavern  and  locality,  before  the  negative 
proposition  could  be  substantiated.  The  one  clear  print  of  a  man's 
foot  would  prove  that  man  was,  or  had  been,  in  the  island,  but  it 
would  be  requisite  to  see  that  no  human  footprint  was  visible 
througliout  its  entire  length  and  breadth,  that  no  vestige  of  a 
human  inhabitant  could  be  discovered,  before  an  individual  would 
be  entitled  to  say,  that  no  man  was  or  ever  had  been  there.  And  the 
difficulty  of  making  good  the  negative  would  increase  with  the  en- 
largement of  the  country  and  the  number  and  size  of  the  localities 
to  be  gone  over. 

The  same  principle  holds  with  regard  to  extent  of  time  as  to 

*  A3  to  the  general  character  of  the  atheism  amoug  the  people,  we  here  adduce 
two  competent  witnesseis.  Dr.  Krummacher,  in  his  Alliance  Paper  on  Infidelity 
in  Germany,  remarks,  "that  Atlieism  in  the  lower  classes  appeaj-s  as  a  plant, 
proceeding  inore  from  political  interest,  than  as  a  proof,  proceeding  from  a  clear 
sclf-jtidgment.  Religion  is  looked  npon  as  an  invention  to  press  down  tho 
people."  Mr.  Vanderkisto,  in  his  deeply  interesting  "Notes  and  Narratives  of  a 
Six  Years'  Mission  among  the  Dens  of  London,"  says  :  "  the  so-called  atheists 
witli  whom  I  have  met,  have  proved,  with  few  exceptions,  upon  being  closely 
quostionod,  not  realhj  to  he  atheists  at  all.  Tliey  have  admitted  some  causation, 
and  wlien  pressed  closely  upon  the  subject  of  intelligent  causation,  and  required 
to  define  terms,  tliey  have  fairly  broken  down,  and  become  angry.  Atheism  is  to 
be  regarded  as' the  desperate  shift  of  an  ill-regulated  mind,  determined  to  rid 
itself  of  responsibility  at  the  expense  of  all  reason  and  argument." 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVTXE    EXISTENCE.  13 

extent  of  space.  Let  it  be  affirmed  of  the  British  monarch  that, 
on  a  certain  occasion,  she  entered,  in  the  most  unostentatious 
manner,  into  a  poor  cottage  and  relieved  with  her  own  hands  a 
suffering  family.  Nothing  more  would  be  requisite  to  substantiate 
the  affirmation  than  the  honest  testimony  of  the  favoured  cottagers, 
or  the  truthful  word  of  some  competent  witnesses.  But  let  tho 
negative  statement  be  made,  that  tlie  monarch  never  entered  such 
a  humble  abode,  and  never  administered  relief  in  such  a  way,  and 
it  is  obvious  that  very  much  is  necessarj^  to  make  the  statement 
good.  No  one  would  be  warranted  to  utter  such  a  negative,  but 
an  individual  who  had  closely  followed  the  monarch  through  eve]-j 
path  and  winding  which  she  took  in  private  life,  or  who  was,  in 
some  way  or  another,  cognizant  of  all  her  out-door  movements 
throughout  every  day  of  every  year  since  she  ascended  the  tlu'one. 
Did  the  individual's  experience  extend  so  far  as  three  hundred  and 
sixty-four  days  of  a  given  year  and  no  farther,  for  aught  he  knew, 
the  condescension  might  have  been  manifested  and  the  good  deed 
performed  on  the  very  day  to  which  his  knowledge  did  not  reach. 
The  difficulty  of  establishing  the  negative  would  increase  as  the 
time  extended  to  the  whole  reign,  and  it  would  be  absolutely 
insurmountable  when  made  to  embrace  not  only  a  particular 
monai-ch  but  all  the  sovereigns  that  ever  sat  on  the  British  tlu-one. 
Even  in  the  absence  of  all  proof  to  the  contrary,  wdiat  an  amount 
of  presumption  would  be  implied  in  saying  that  no  English 
monarch  ever  entered  an  humble  dwelling,  and  did  a  benevolent 
act  to  its  poor  inmates,  but  the  arrogance  would  be  complete  if  the 
statement  was  made  in  defiance  of  one  or  more  well-authenticated 
instances  of  such  benignant  doings  in  the  annals  of  English 
royalty. 

These  remarks  will  enable  us  to  see  what  extraordinary  attain- 
ments must  have  been  made  before  an  individual  would  be  entitled 
to  say,  There  is  no  God.  It  is  a  negative  proposition  which  no 
finite  mind  can  enunciate  without  being  guilty  of  the  most 
astounding  presumption;  and  the  man  would  only  beti-ay  his 
folly  who  should  attempt  to  demonstrate  it.  The  sceptic  may 
express  his  doid^ts  of  the  Divine  existence  and  give  reasons 
for  his  doubting,  but  beyond  this,  scepticism  can  achieve  nothing. 
In  order  to  substantiate  the  affirmative  proposition,  that  there  is  a 
God,  nothing  more  might  be  necessary  than  to  i)oint  to  some  of 
the  footprints  of  the  Creator  which  are  visible  in  the  heavens  and 
the  earth.  If  there  be  a  God,  only  a  very  small  amount  of  know- 
ledge and  experience  would  be  requisite  to  prove  it.  The  evidence 
might  lie,  as  we  say  that  it  does  lie,  in  a  flower  of  the  field,  in  a 
leaf  of  the  forest,  in  a  single  hand,  or  in  a  single  eye.  But  the 
negative  proposition  could  be  substantiated  within  no  such  com- 
pass. Even  were  there  no  indications  of  the  Creator  in  that 
wondrous  microcosm  the  human  eye,  or  in  the  waving  leo*',  or  in 


14  atheism;  or, 

the  "blooming  floorer,  still  it  were  an  illegitimate  inference  and  a 
manifestation  of  high  presxmiption  to  conclude  that  there  is  no 
God.  He  must  needs  have  traversed  not  only  every  part  of  "this 
dim  spot  which  men  call  earth,"  but  he  must  have  wandered  fi'om 
stai*  to  star,  made  himself  thoroughly  acquainted  with  all  worlds, 
have  searched  into  the  records  of  all  ages,  and  have  foimd 
throughout  all  space  and  all  time  no  evidence  for  design,  before 
an  individual  could  be  entitled  to  say  that  the  universe  is  without 
a  God.  This  idea  is  forcibly  expressed  by  John  Foster, -^  and 
eloquently  illustrated  by  Dr.  Chalmers.  +  "The  wonder  then 
turns,"  says  the  original  minded  author  of  the  Essays,  "  on  the 
great  process,  by  which  a  man  could  gTow  to  the  immense  intel- 
ligence which  can  know  that  there  is  no  God.  What  ages  and 
wliat  lights  are  requisite  for  this  attainment !  This  intelligence 
involves  the  very  attributes  of  Divinity,  while  a  God  is  denied. 
For  unless  this  man  is  omnipresent,  unless  he  is  at  this  moment 
in  every  place  in  the  universe,  he  cannot  know  but  there  may  be 
in  some  place  manifestations  of  a  Deity,  by  which  even  he  would 
be  overpowered.  If  he  does  not  know  absolutely  every  agent  in 
the  universe,  the  one  that  he  does  not  know  may  be  God.  If  he 
is  not  himself  the  chief  agent  in  the  universe,  and  does  not  know 
what  is  so,  that  which  is  so  may  be  God.  If  he  is  not  in  absolute 
possession  of  all  the  propositions  that  constitute  universal  truth, 
the  one  which  he  wants  may  be,  that  there  is  a  God.  If  he 
cannot  with  certainty  assign  the  cause  of  all  that  he  perceives  to 
exist,  that  cause  may  be  God.  If  he  does  not  know  everything 
that  has  been  done  in  the  immeasurable  ages  that  are  past,  some 
things  may  have  been  done  by  a  God.  Thus,  unless  he  knows  all 
things,  that  is,  precludes  all  other  divine  existence  by  being  Deity 
himself,  he  cannot  know  that  the  Being  whose  existence  he  rejects, 
does  not  exist.  But  he  must  laiow  that  he  does  not  exist,  else  he 
deserves  equal  contempt  and  compassion  for  the  temerity  with 
which  he  firmly  avows  his  rejection  and  acts  accordingly." 
Atheism  is  thus  shown,  at  the  very  outset,  to  be  illogical  and  to 
rest  on  a  monstrous  assumption,  so  that  we  are  prepared  to  welcome 
whatever  evidences  offer  themselves  for  the  truth  of  the  proposition 
that  there  is  a  God 

But  not  only  is  the  proof  of  the  non-existence  of  God  an  intel- 
lectual impossibility.  His  existence  is  felt  to  be  an  intellectual 
necessity.  The  mind  of  man  is  so  constituted  that  it  cannot  be 
satisfied  without  it,  and  hence  the  monstrous  violence  done  to  his 
intellectual  and  moral  nature  when  he  attempts  to  banish  from 
him  the  idea  of  a  First  Cause.  That  there  must  be  a  First  Cause, 
is  an  axiom  assumed  in  all  our  reasoning  upward  from  the  phe- 
nomena of  nature  to  natm-e's  God.  The  snow  that  is  now  thickly 
falling  as  we  wi'ite  these  ]mges,  the  stormy  wind  that  is  drifting 

*  Essays,  15th  eel.  p.  .35.  f  Institutes  of  Theology,  vol.  i.  p.  63. 


THE    DENIAL    OV   THE    D1VI>;E    EXISTENCE.  \iP 

tliat  snow  against  our  windows  and  doors,  are  effects  the  causes  of 
wLich  we  investigate  and  the  laws  of  which  we  trace  ;  but  in  our 
upward  track  we  are  seeking  after  a  resting  point,  we  come  to  the 
last  link  in  the  chain  of  material  causation,  and  from  the  very- 
constitution  of  our  minds  we  repose  in  a  cause  essentially  different 
fi-om  all  others,  which  is  the  I  A^r,  the  selfexistent  and  inde- 
pendent God.  The  idea  of  a  great  First  Cause  is  not  derived 
originally  from  the  phenomena  of  natm-e  around  us,  but  assumed 
in  our  investigations  into  these  phenomena.  It  ip  an  axiomatic 
truth  which  every  sound  reasoner  carries  along  witb  liim  in  his 
ascent  from  effects  to  their  apparent  causes,  and  to  which  the  mind 
from  a  felt  necessity  fully  surrenders  itself  wlien  it  lias  reached 
the  last  link  in  the  phenomena  of  nature.  The  Greek  logician  bas 
said,  "  all  that  moves  refers  us  to  a  mover,  and  it  were  only  an 
endless  adjournment  of  causes  were  there  not  a  primary  im.- 
movable  Mover."  Such  an  endless  adjournment  of  causes  can 
never  be  resorted  to  without  doing  great  violence  to  our  mental 
constitution,  and  forcibly  thwarting  its  natural  tendencies.  It  is 
just  a  perpetual  armed  attempt  to  thrust  the  mind  away  from  the 
rest  to  which,  from  the  law  of  its  being,  it  is  ever  aspiring.  '_'  Our 
minds  cannot  be  satisfied,"  remarks  Professor  Whewell,*  "with  a 
series  of  successive,  dependent  causes  and  effects,  without  some- 
thing first  and  independent.  We  pass  from  effect  to  cause,  and 
from  that  to  a  higher  cause,  in  search  of  something  on  which  the 
mind  can  rest ;  but  if  we  can  do  nothing  but  repeat  this  process, 
there  is  no  use  in  it.  We  move  our  limbs  but  make  no  advance. 
Our  question  is  not  answered  but  evaded.  The  mind  cannot 
acquiesce  in  the  destiny  thus  presented  to  it,  of  being  referred 
from  event  to  event,  from  object  to  object,  along  an  interminable 
vista  of  causation  and  time.  Now,  this  mode  of  stating  the 
reply, —  to  say  that  the  mind  cannot  tJius  be  satisfied,  appears  to  be 
equivalent  to  saying  that  the  mind  is  conscious  of  a  principle  in 
virtue  of  which  such  a  view  as  this  must  be  rejected; — the  mind 
takes  refuge  in  the  assumption  of  a  First  Cause,  from  an  employ- 
ment inconsistent  with  its  owti  nature."  "That  First  Cause, 
indeed,"  observes  Dr.  Harris,!  "  must  be  immensely  different,  both 
in  rank  and  in  nature,  from  the  subordinate  physical  causes  to 
which  it  has  imparted  motion  ;  but  still  the  mind  feels  the  ne- 
cessity for  such  a  cause  with  all  the  force  of  an  intellectual 
instinct.  The  mind  was  constituted  to  feel  this  necessity,  and 
thus  to  supply  the  last  link  in  the  chain  of  reasoning  from  itself, 
as  much  as  it  was  made  and  meant  to  find  the  preceding  links  in 
the  phemomena  of  nature." 

Having  thus  glanced  at  the  intellectual  impossibility  involved 
in  the  negative  proposition  that  there  is  no  God,  and  at  the  intel- 

*  Indications  of  the  Creator,  2nd  ed.  p.  198-9. 
+  Pre-Adamite  Earth,  p.  151. 


]6  atheism;  or;, 

lectiial  necessity  for  the  axiom  that  there  must  be  a  First  Cause, 
we  are  prepai'ed  to  consider  the  real  value  of  the  arguments  a 
j)riori  and  a  posteriori.  And  we  cannot  help  remarking,  at  tho 
outset,  that  too  exclusive  an  importance  has  been  attached  to  each 
of  these  celebrated  forms  of  proof,  as  if  the  one  were  absolutely 
independent  of  the  other.  The  two,  in  a  great  measure,  go  hand 
in  hand,  and  conduct  us  to  the  jjosition  that  there  is  a  God,  the 
Great  Creator  and  Parent  of  the  universe.  The  a  jrriori  mode  of 
reasoning  is  the  exclusive  idol  of  many  of  the  German  logicians, 
tliey  have  an  utter  contempt  for  our  inductive  philosophy  and 
matter-of-fact  theolog}'.  Experience,  the  great  teacher,  is  pro- 
fessedly ignored  in  their  argumentation,  the  world  with  all  its 
palpable  reahties  is  shut  out,  and  from  mere  mental  abstractions 
they  evolve  ah  existencies  and  all  truth.  But  in  their  hands  this 
kind  of  reasoning  has  completely  failed.  It  conducts  the  mind 
to  no  firm  resting-place.  It  bev/ilders,  instead  of  ehicidating,  our 
notions  of  God,  of  man,  and  the  universe.  It  g^'.ves  us  no  divine 
personal  existence,  and  leaves  us  floating  in  a  region  of  mere 
vague  abstractions.  Such  reasonings  are  either  altogether  vain, 
or  are  not  really  what  they  profess  to  be. 

In  our  country  the  name  of  Dr.  Clarke  is  chiefly  associated 
with  the  a  priori  argument.  He  and  many  others  attached  to  it 
an  immense  importance.  But  however  highly  extolled  in  past 
times,  and  worthy  to  be  admu-ed  as  a  specimen  of  intellect,  it  is 
now  generally  set  aside  as  insufficient  of  itself  to  demonstrate  the 
Being  and  Attributes  of  God.  Clarke  himself  found  it  necessary 
to  stoop  to  the  argument «  posteriori,  and  thereby  acknowledged 
the  failure  of  attempting  to  reason  exclusively  a  p)riori.  In  ex- 
amining his  celebrated  demonstration,  it  is  found  to  be  really 
inductive,  and  not  wholly  independent  of  experience  as  supposed 
Our  conception  of  a  First  Cause  is  not  indeed  derived  from  ex- 
perience, for  it  is  felt  to  be  an  intellectual  necessity,  but  experience 
is  necessary  to  its  development.  The  very  first  jn-oposition  that 
something  must  have  existed  from  eternity,  since  it  assumes  that 
something  exists,  is  a  posteriori.  And  in  order  to  prove  that  this 
eternal  something  is  not  "  a  blind  and  nnintelUgent  necessity,  but 
in  the  most  proper  sense  an  imdcrstandimj  and  reaUy  active  being," 
in  which,  as  he  well  says,  "  lies  the  main  question  between  us  and 
the  atheists,"  he  resorts  to  the  world  with  its  orderly  arrangements, 
and  on  tlie  ground  of  fact  and  exjoerience  builds  up  his  argument. --'= 
'Tiie  fate  of  Dr.  Clarke's  pretended  demonstration,  and  the  result, 
in  so  far  as  theology  is  concerned,  of  tlie  transcendental  reasoning 
of  the  continental  philosophers,  show  the  futility  of  attempting  to 
rise  up  to  the  lieight  of  the  great  argument  for  the  existence  of 
God  on  the  h  priori  method  alone. 

TiiB  o\0i  a  posteriori  argument,  while  decried  by  the  German 

*  Clarke's  Discourse,  Prop.  viii. 


THE    DENIAL    OF    THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE  17 

logicians  on  the  one  hand,  has,  it  must  he  confessed,  been  invested 
^vith  too  exclusive  an  importance  by  some  of  our  own  theologians 
on  the  other.     It  is  necessarily  limited  in  its  range.     It  carries  us 
upwards  from  effects  to  causes,  from  the  evidences  of  design  to  a 
designer;   bat   it  cannot  of  itself  carry  us  to  the  throne  of  the 
Eternal,  who  is  uncaused  and  the  cause  of  all.     We  cannot,  by  a 
strict  process  of  inductive  reasoning,  infer  from  one  or  more  finite 
effects  that  the  cause  of  them  is  absolutely  infinite.     Design  proves 
a  designer,  but  it  does  not  prove  that  the  designer  is  God.     The 
argument  from  external  and  visi])ie  nature  leads  the  way,  but, 
unaided  by  other  prooi's  or  conceptions,  would  never  conduct  us 
to  the  I  AM  THAT  I  A]\r.     The  marks  of  contrivance  which  are  so 
palpable  in  everything  we  see  in  the  fields  of  creation  give  us  the 
logical  conclusion  that  every  thing  has  had  a  contriver.     They  give 
us  also  the  idea  of  gi-eat  wisdom  and  goodness  and  power,  but  of 
themselves  they  do  not  give  us  the  jiroof  of  a  Being  possessed  of 
infinite  and  absolute  perfections.     The  argument  points,  like  a 
finger-post,  in  tliat  direction  ;   but,  strictly  speaking,  we  leave  the 
argument,  or  it  leaves  us,  and  we  resign  ourselves  to  tlie  necessary 
conviction  tliat  there  is  a  Great  First  Designer  and  that  he  is  God. 
There  is  nothing  elaborate  in  the  process.     It  is  simpler  and  easier 
than  the   simplest   step.     From   effects  we   ascend   naturally  to 
causes,  from  subordinate  laws  we  rise  up  to  the  highest  law;  but 
when  the  inductive  philosophy  has  carried  us  easily  up,  and  placed 
us  as  it  were  on  the  highest  point  in  the  series  of  material  caus- 
ation, it  has  not  given  us  the  great  First  Intelligent  Cause.     It 
has,  however,  conducted  us  so  far  that,  by  our  very  mental  consti 
tution,  we  repose  in  the  conviction  that  beyond  the  series  of  mere 
mechanical  causes  and  effects,  is   the  Infinite  Cause  of  all.     8.  t 
Isaac  Newton  has  truly  said,  "  though  every  true  step  made  in  this 
philosophy  brings  us  not  immediately  to  the  knowledge   of  the 
Fii'st  Cause,  yet  it  brings  us  nearer  to  it."'     Let  the  chain  of  mate- 
rial causation  be  lengthened  out  ever  so  far,  we  only  feel  however 
at  the  topmost  link,  what  is  felt  throughout  all  the  lower  links, 
the  necessity  of  a  cause  above   all  otliers  in  nature  and  rank, 
a  cause  uncaused  and  the  cause  of  all.     Induction  points  to  this, 
but  it  does  not  give  it.     Call  it  an  intuitive  sentiment,  a  primitive 
judgment,  an  intellectual  necessity,  or  what  you  will,  the  mind  is 
so  constituted  as  in  the  reasoning  process  to  supply  it  and  rest  in 
it.     The  starting-point  of  the  ci  posteriori  m-gument,^v]nc\\  is  the 
idea  of  design  or  causality,  is  an  a  priori  belief,  and  from  the  argu- 
ment itself  we  pass  necessarily  to  tlie  conviction  that  there  is  a 
Fu-st  Cause,  differing  essentially  from  all  others,  whose  name  is 
God.     So  that  it  is  vain  to  assert  an  exclusive  claim  for  either 
iirgument,  since  they  involve  and  aid  each  other.* 

*  The  Atbeist,  in  availing  himself  of  the  exclusive  importance  attached  to  the 
a  posteriori  avgnrnont,  thu'i  reasons;  "if  design  implies  a  designer,  contrivance 

G 


18  ATHEISM  ;    01{, 

The  exclusive  claim  for  either  of  these  arguments  being  disposed 
of,  we  are  prepared  to  notice  the  indications  of  the  Creator  that 
lie  without  the  field  of  revealed  truth.  And  here  we  avail  our- 
selves of  the  rich  contributions  in  the  way  of  proof,  which  are 
furnished  by  the  phenomena  both  of  matter  and  mind;  and  in 
doing  so,  we  repudiate  neither  argument,  but  make  use  of  both. 
The  plain  way  in  which  men  have  reasoned  from  the  beginning, 
is  upwards  from  the  evidences  of  design  in  the  material  universe 
to  the  existence  of  the  Great  Designer;  upwards  from  the  orderly 
and  beneficial  dispositions  of  matter  to  the  Divine  Hand  that 
framed  the  whole.  And  this  old  path  is  the  truest  and  safest  still. 
It  has  been  adorned  by  the  eloquence  of  Cicero  and  Brougham, 
of  Paley,  Chalmers,  and  others.  It  is  the  ai-gument  of  the  royal 
psalmist:  "The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  firma- 
ment sheweth  his  handiwork."  Nature  in  all  her  departments 
abounds  in  such  evidences.  The  discoveries  of  physical  science  only 
enlarge  to  our  view  the  vast  magazine  of  contrivances,  all  of  which 
point  upward  in  the  direction  of  the  great  Infinite  Contriver.  And 
our  progress  in  that  direction  is  in  nowise  arrestoa  by  any  of  the 
theories  which  profess  to  account  for  the  origin  of  the  universe,  or 
to  give  us  the  beginning  of  its  existing  motions  and  arrangements. 
The  hypothesis  of  Laplace,  which  has  been  so  much  vaunted 
against  our  Natiual  Theology,  and  which  would  trace  backward 
the  earth  and  the  whole  solar  system  to  an  extremely  diffiised 
nebulosity  that  gradually  cooled  down  and  condensed,  has  been 
very  much  discredited  by  recent  discoveries  of  the  telescope.  But 
even  supposing  that  it  were  verified,  it  would  not  destroy  the  argu- 
ment for  a  God  derived  from  the  collocations  of  matter,  nor  prevent 
us  from  going  beyond  itself  to  an  intelligent  First  Cause.  "  Let  it 
be  supposed,"  remarks  ProfessorWhewell,*  "  that  the  point  to  which 
this  hypothesis  leads  us,  is  the  ultimate  point  of  physical  science  ; 
that  tiie  farthest  glimpse  we  can  obtain  of  the  material  universe  by 
our  natural  faculties,  shows  it  to  us  occupied  by  a  boundless  abyss 
of  luminous  matter;  still  we  ask,  how  space  came  to  be  thus  occupied 
—  how  matter  came  to  be  thus  luminous  ?  If  we  establish  by  phy- 
sical proofs,  that  the  first  fact  which  can  be  traced  in  the  history 
of  the  world,  is  tliat  there  was  light;  we  shall  still  be  led,  even  by 
our  natural  reason,  to  suppose  that  before  this  could  occur,  '  God 
said,  let  there  be  light.' "  It  is  indeed  true,  as  we  before  hinted, 
that  the  experimental  argument  of  itself  does  not  give  us  an  Infi- 
nite cause.  But  if  it  carries  us  to  the  last  link  in  the  chain  which 
is  furnished  by  the  phenomena  of  nature,  it  leaves  us  to  repose, 

a  contriver,  nature's  contrivor  must  have  been   himself  contrived."    The  mon- 
strous assumption,  out  of  which  arises  this  atheistical  inference,  is,  thatnatuie"s 
contriver  has  in  himself  marks  of  design.    This  is  the  reasoning  of  a  man  whose 
chi"r  distinction  is  that  he  is  editor  of  "The  Eeasoner." 
*  Indications  of  the  Creator,  p.  63. 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE.  .19 

from  an  intellectual  necessity,  in  the  conviction  that  there  is  an 
uncaused  cause  which  is  the  cause  of  all.  The  old  assumption  of 
an  eternal  succession  of  finite  beings  was  made  to  get  rid  of  th' 
idea  of  One  Eternal  BeiDg.  That  the  supposition  is  unphiloso- 
phical  and  absurd  has  been  shown  thousands  of  times.  The  mind, 
from  its  very  constitution,  disowns  it.  Men  may  form  as  many 
links  in  the  chain  of  causes  as  they  choose,  but  they  must,  at  last, 
reach  an  uncaused  Cause.  It  is  strictly  tme  that  from  nothing 
nothing  can  proceed.  Something  must  have  existed  before  all 
finite  beings,  or  whence  came  these  finite  beings  into  existence? 
That  something  must  be  self-existent,  underived,  necessary,  and 
eternal.  It  is  He  who  is  the  I  am,  and  to  whom  we  apply  the 
sublime  language  of  tlie  ancient  seer:  "Before  the  mountains 
were  brought  forth,  or  ever  thou  hadst  formed  the  earth  and  the 
world,  even  from  everlasting  to  everlasting  thou  art  God."  It 
matters  not  whether  it  be  in  the  department  of  zoology,  with  its 
two  well-established  princi])les,  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as 
spontaneous  generation,  and  that  there  is  no  transmutation  of  the 
species,  or  whether  it  be  in  the  department  of  a  sublime  and  ever- 
enlarging  astronomy ;  it  matters  not  whether  we  extend  our  survey 
to  the  systems  of  suns  that  roll  throughouttheimmensity  of  space, 
or  w^hether  we  centre  it  on  that  wondrous  microcosm,  the  human 
eye ;  we  meet  wuth  teeming  evidences  of  design,  which  not  only 
carry  us  to  a  designer,  but  hand  us  over,  necessarily,  if  we  may  so 
speak,  to  the  belief  that  the  great  First  Designer  is  God.  It  is  no 
mechanical  necessity  that  we  thus  reach.  It  is  Jehovah,  the  living, 
and  the  life-giving  One. 

This  argument  has  also  received  increasingly  rich  contributions 
from  a  closer  study  of  the  constitution  of  the  mind,  and  a  more 
perfect  analysis  of  its  various  phenomena.  To  reason  upwards 
from  the  laws  of  our  mental  constitution  to  the  Infinite  Mind, 
who  is  the  Parent  Source  of  the  whole,  is  just  as  experimental, 
(though,  in  neither  case,  dissociated  from  «  priori  beliefs,)  as  to 
reason  from  material  nature  up  to  nature's  God.  Some  of  our 
popular  writers  on  natural  theology  have  either  entirely  overlooked 
the  evidences  of  design  presented  by  our  mental  constitution,  or 
have  satisfied  themselves  with  merely  adverting  to  them.  Paley, 
who  has  written  so  admirably  on  the  material  phenomena,  never 
once  extends  his  argument  to  the  intellectual  and  moral.  This 
omission  has  been  accounted  for  by  the  astonishing  discoveries 
of  physical  science,  which,  bringing  palpably  into  view  a  vast 
assemblage  of  material  evidences,  have,  for  the  time,  thrown  into 
the  shade  the  proofs  of  the  Divine  existence  and  character  derived 
from  the  iniiid.  And  yet  the  field  of  man's  inner  nature  is  as 
legitunate  a  province  of  the  inductive  philosophy  as  the  external 
world  with  its  manifold  organizations,  and  furnishes  no  less 
numerous  and  greatly  more  influential  evidences  of  an  intelligent 

c  2 


20  atheism;  on, 

Cause.  Lord  Brougham,  in  his  "  Introductory  Discourse  of  Na- 
tural Tlieology,"  and  Dr.  Chahners,  in  his  "Institutes,"  have. 
liherally  supplied  what,  in  this  department,  was  lacking  in  some 
of  our  older  writers.  The  mind  is  a  created  effect,  and,  like  matter, 
is  a  proper  suhject  of  ohservation.  It  has  its  own  peculiar  pheno- 
mena and  laws,  which  we  can  examine,  and,  from  tliem,  gather 
proofs  of  the  Infinite  Mind,  which  is  the  source  of  all.  Between 
it  and  matter  there  is  a  gulf  fixed.  The  properties  of  the  one  are 
wholly  different  from  the  properties  of  the  other.  No  combination 
of  mechanical  forces  could  ever  produce  an  intelligent  and  moral 
being.  That  mind  is  a  mere  modification  of  matter,  is  no  less  at 
variance  with  the  inductive  philosophy  than  is  the  exploded  dogma 
of  the  transmutation  of  the  species.  Here,  then,  is  an  efiect  en- 
dowed with  intelligence,  reason,  and  moral  sentiment.  This  effect 
must  have  had  a  cause.  And  on  the  evident  principle  that  no 
effect  can  possess  any  perfection  which  was  not  in  the  cause,  we 
naturally  infer  that  the  creator  of  the  human  spirit  is  a  moral  and 
intelligent  being.  This  is  as  much  an  inductive  process  of  rea- 
soning, as  the  step  we  take  in  advancing  from  material  nature  up 
to  Him  who  has  designed  it.  Men  have  reasoned  in  this  simple 
way  from  the  beginning.  "  He  that  planted  the  ear,  shall  he  not 
hear?  he  that  formed  the  eye,  shall  he  not  see?  he  that  teacheth 
man  knowledge,  shall  not  he  know  ?  "  And  since  there  is  an  in- 
tellectual necessity  for  a  First  Cause,  himself  uncaused,  and  the 
cause  of  all,  his  seeing  must  be  all-seeing ;  his  knowledge  must  be 
omniscience ;  his  moral  nature  must  be  absolutely  perfect.  The 
most  striking  phenomenon  in  our  mental  constitution  is  con- 
science, the  man  within  the  breast  as  it  has  been  called.  It  sits 
enthroned  amid  the  other  principles  of  our  nature,  and  is  invested 
with  a  rightful  authority  over  them.  Its  voice — the  voice  of  a 
sovereign  judge — is  heard  above  the  tumult  of  passion,  and  the 
rebellious  uproar  of  the  less  noble  propensities.  And  though  its 
high  behests  are  not  always  obeyed,  yet  its  right  to  rule  is  every 
where  acknowledged.  It  is  sovereign  de  jure  even  where  it  is  not 
sovereign  de  facto.  Now  let  it  be  observed,  tliat  all  the  authority 
of  this  faculty  is  on  the  side  of  righteousness  and  truth  ;  that  it 
has  sanctions  for  the  enforcement  of  its  utterances  ;  that  it  approves 
the  good,  and  denounces  the  evil ;  and  in  the  righteous  supremacy 
of  this  part  of  our  nature,  we  have  a  strong  proof  lor  the  existence 
of  a  just  and  holy  God.  The  authority  of  a  law  of  right  and  wrong 
in  our  moral  constitution  implies  a  lawgiver,  the  setting  up  of  a 
tribunal  within  the  breast  points  to  a  yet  higher  tribunal  in  the 
heavens,  and  from  the  felt  presence  of  a  judge  within  us,  denouncing 
wrong,  and  sanctioning  right,  we  infer  the  existence  of  a  righteous 
Judge  over  us,  who  is  at  once  its  Author  and  Lord.  In  the  supre- 
macy of  this  moral  principle  we  have  strong  evidence  not  only  of 
an  intelligent  Creator,  but  of  one  who  is  just  and  true  in  all  his 


T}IF.    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    EXISTENCE.  21 

waj's,  and  holy  in  all  his  \vorl\S.  "And  this  theology  of  conscience," 
as  Dr.  Chalmers  remarks,  "  has  done  more  to  uphold  a  sense  of 
God  in  the  world  than  all  the  theology  of  academic  demonstration." 
Conscience,  however,  though  the  chief,  is  only  a  part  of  our  mental 
phenomena.  The  mind  is  replete  with  other  evidences  for  the 
heing  and  character  of  God.  These  we  do  not  stay  to  illustrate. 
Suffice  it  to  say  that  in  the  intellectual  powers  of  man,  and 
their  adaptation  to  external  nature  —  an  amazing  assemhlage 
of  brilliant  and  magnificent  phenomena  —  in  the  emotional 
part  of  his  nature,  with  the  hallowed  pleasure  inseparable  from 
the  indulgence  of  good  affections,  and  the  wretched  disquietude  at 
tendant  on  evil  ones,  speaking  loudly,  as  they  do,  for  a  God  who 
loves  righteousness,  and  hates  iniquity;  —  and  in  the  supremacy 
of  conscience,  enthroned,  as  it  were,  above  the  whole,  and  ever 
uttering  her  voice  on  the  side  of  whatsoever  things  are  true,  and 
lovely,  and  of  good  report,  and  against  their  opposites ;  and  not 
only  so,  but  rewarding  well-doing,  and  punishing  wrong-doing;  — 
in  such  mental  departments  of  natural  theology  as  these  we  gather 
no  less  rich  contributions  to  the  evidence  of  a  God,  than  from  the 
field  of  external  nature.*  Indeed,  in  man  himself,  we  have  an 
embodiment  of  the  whole  argument.  He  is  fearfully  and  wonder- 
fully made.  The  human  frame  is  the  noblest  structure  beneath 
the  heavens.  In  the  exquisite  mechanism  of  his  body,  and  in  the 
primitive  judgments,  and  wondrous  operations  of  his  mind,  we 
have  the  clearest  indications  of  the  Creator  that  lie  within  the 
range  of  natural  theology.  "  If  you  want  argument  from  design," 
says  Mr.  Morell,f  "  then  you  see  in  the  human  frame  the  most  per 
feet  of  all  known  organization.  If  you  want  the  argument  from 
belnrf^  then  man,  in  his  conscious  dependence,  has  the  clearest  con- 
viction of  that  independent  and  absolute  one,  on  which  his  own 
being  reposes.  If  you  want  the  argument  from  reason  and  morals, 
then  the  human  mind  is  the  only  known  repository  of  both.  Man  is, 
in  fact,  a  microcosm  —  a  universe  in  himself;  and  whatever  proof  the 
whole  universe  affords,  is  involved  in  j^rincipJe,  in  man  liimself. 
With  the  image  of  God  before  us,  who  can  doubt  of  the  divine 
type  ?  " 

The  argument  then  for  the  being  of  a  God  is  neither  exclusively 
d  2)osterion,  nor  exclusively  a  j)nori,  but  partakes  of  both.  Man 
cannot  declare  that  there  is  no  God,  without  being  gviilty  of  the 
most  tremendous  presumption.  He  is  a  fool  who  hazards  the 
assertion,  because  it  involves  an  amount  of  intelligence  w-hich  no 
creature  can  possess,  the  very  attribute  of  omniscence,  while  He, 
in  whom  alone  that  attribute  resides,  is  denied.  And  not  only  so, 
but  there  is  an  intellectual  necessity  for  a  Being  uncaused  and  the 
cause  of  all.    Tiie  mind  cannot  be  satisfied  without  it.    It  refuses  to 

*  Seo  C]ialmer9"i5  Institutes,  vol.  i.  pp.  on— 110. 
+  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  pp.  010.7. 


13ass  along  a  depcndeut  series  of  causes  and  effects,  without  resting-  hi 
something  that  is  first  and  independent.  That  there  must  be  a  first 
cause,  is  a  primitive  belief,  a  jiroposition  that  lies  beyond  the  pale  of 
demonstration,  —  a  principle  with  which  we  start  in  our  reasoning 
upwards  and  to  the  full  conviction  of  which  we  surrender  ourselves  at 
the  height  of  the  argument.  The  good  old  way  in  which  men  have 
reasoned  from  the  beginning,  is  upwards  from  the  evidences  of 
design  to  a  designer,  upwards  from  the  goodly  collocations  of  mat- 
ter that  meet  our  view,  and  the  mental  phenomena  that  conie 
under  our  consciousness,  to  the  great  Parent  Source  of  all  the 
orderly  relations  of  matter  and  mind.  And  this  simple  way  is  the 
best  still.  Finite  efiects,  indeed,  can  never,  of  themselves,  give  us 
an  infinite  cause.  The  d  jtosteriori  argument,  strictly  speaking, 
cannot,  unaided,  carry  us  up  to  the  tlu'one  in  the  heavens,  and 
Ijrove  that  beyond  the  circle  of  nat\n-al  causes  and  effects  is 
the  great  First  Cause  of  all.  But  it  leads  us  very  far  onward  in 
that  path.  And  then,  by  a  soft  and  imperceptible  step,  transfers 
us  to  the  natural  conviction  that  there  is  an  independent  existence 
Avho  is  the  Alpha  and  the  Omega,  the  beginning  and  the  ending, 
the  First  and  the  Last.  To  the  height  of  this  great  argument  we 
rise  from  the  evidences  furnished  both  by  matter  and  mind.  The 
mateiial  universe  is  full  of  indications  of  the  natural  attributes  of 
the  Creator.  And  our  mental  constitution  is  no  less  full  (A  evi- 
dences of  his  moral  nature.  We  weaken  our  argument  against 
atheism,  if  we  refuse  to  avail  ourselves  of  the  contributions  in  the 
way  of  proof  which  are  fm'nished  by  either  depaitment.  Both  lie 
within  the  domain  of  the  inductive  iDhilosophy.  And  with  the 
evidences  gathered  from  both,  we  logically  infer  that  our  Maker 
possesses  transcendent  attributes ;  that  he  is  of  great  power,  and 
wisdom,  and  goodness,  one  who  loveth  righteousness,  and  hateth 
iniquity.  From  the  great  we  pass,  by  a  different  link,  to  the  in- 
finite; from  transcendent  attributes  we  pass  to  absolute  perfec- 
tions. And  that  link  is  supplied  by  the  mind  itself.  The  transi- 
tion, in  most  cases,  is  made  imperceptibly;  but  it  is  done.  We 
have  a  certain  primitive  conviction  that  there  is  a  Being  of  neces- 
sary and  unchanging  existence,  the  Maker  of  all  things,  and  in 
whom  centres,  in  an  infinite  degree,  every  perfection  that  is  found 
in  His  works.  It  is  thus  that  we,  apart  from  the  scriptural  reve- 
lation, rise  with  a  firm  step  from  nature  up  to  nature  s  God. 

The  testimony  of  tlie  Bible  now  comes  and  crowns  the  tlieistic 
argument.  It  authenticates  the  deductions  of  enlightened  reason, 
and  confirms  those  primitive  judgments,  whereby  we  repose  in  the 
belief  tliat  God  is,  and  that  He  is  what  He  is.  Tlie  very  first 
sublime  utterance  of  inspiration.  In  the  hegbrninfj  God  created  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  sets  its  seal  that  our  reasoning  upwards 
from  matter  and  mind  to  the  Infinite  creating  Mind,  is  true 
The  Bible  presupposes  the  Divine  existence,  and  never  formally 
attempts  to  prove  it.     It  appeals  to  that  very  experimental  evi- 


PANTHEISM.  23 

(lence,  which  is  patent  to  the  eyes  of  all  men,  as  a  witness  against 
irreligion  and  idolatry,  and  for  the  only  living  and  true  God, 
while  it  throws  a  lustre,  peculiar  to  itself,  around  his  moral  cha- 
racter, and  his  relations  to  man  and  the  world.  In  the  beneficial 
collocations  of  matter,  in  the  orderly  relations  of  this  goodly  uni- 
verse, and  in  the  constitution  of  tlie  mind,  with  its  intellectual 
powers  and  moral  sentiments,  there  is  a  vast  amount  of  clear 
evidence  which  points  upwards  to  an  infinitely  perfect  Mind. 
But  it  is  when  we  reach  the  Bible  itself,  "  that  wondrous  monu- 
ment of  past  ages,  with  its  firm  place  in  history,  and  its  telling 
])ower  on  men's  hearts,"  that  we  stand  on  an  elevation,  v/hence, 
like  the  angel  in  the  sun,  we  see  in  the  clearest  and  most  impres- 
sive light  the  glory  of  Him  who  created  and  controls  all  things. 
"  God  never  wrought  a  miracle,"  says  Bacon,  "to  convince  atheism, 
because  his  ordinary  works  convince  it."  The  material  pheno- 
mena that  lie  around  us,  and  the  mental  phenomena  that  arise 
within  us,  give  the  lie  to  it.  And  if  men  will  not  believe  on  the 
ground  of  this  evidence  and  the  superadded  evidence  of  revealed 
truth,  neither  would  they  believe  though  the  Eternal  uttered  his 
voice  from  the  rent  heavens,  and  declared  what  He  has  done  in 
His  word,  "  I  am  God,  and  besides  me  there  is  none  else." 

Thus  far  the  proof  has  been  dogmatic.  But  after  all,  to  use  the 
weighty  words  of  Dr.  Arnold,-:^  "the  real  proof  is  the  practical  one; 
that  is,  let  a  man  live  on  the  hypothesis  of  its  falsehood,  the  prac- 
tical result  will  be  bad ;  that  is,  a  man's  besetting  and  constitu- 
tional faults  will  not  be  checked  ;  and  some  of  his  noblest  feelings 
will  be  unexercised,  so  that  if  he  be  right  in  his  opinions,  truth 
and  goodness  are  at  variance  with  one  another,  and  falsehood  is 
more  favourable  to  our  moral  perfection  than  truth !  which  seems 
the  most  monstrous  conclusion  which  the  human  mind  can  pos- 
sibly arrive  at." 


CHAPTER  11. 

THE    DEN-IAL   OF   THE    DIVINE   PEUSONALITT,  OR  PANTHEISM. 

Pautheism  (listingaishecl  from  atheism— The  result  of  severing  two  good  prin- 
ciples—  Pantheism  and  polytheism  a  higher  and  a  lower  grade  —  Seduces  by  its 
comprehensiveness  —  Its  existence  in  the  past — The  doctrine  of  the  Eleatics 
and  of  Buddhism  —  Its  prevalence  in  Germany:  Spinoza,  Schelliug,  Hegel, 
Strauss,  Feuerbach  —  French  philosophy  accused  of  it:  Cousin — Continental 
Socialism  pantheistic  —  An  exotic  in  England — Emerson  and  his  school — In- 
tellectual pantheism  of  Carlyle  — Eemarks  of  Professor  Garbett— Quotation 
from  Tennyson  —  Bearings  of  pantheism  :  Makes  creation  an  inmilable  neces- 
sity, destroys  responsibility,  shuts  out  prayer,  and  extinguishes  individual  im- 
mortality — The  personality  of  God  argued  from  our  own  personality,  from  con- 
sciousness and  inward  expenence,  from  the  language  of  ycripture — The  abso- 
lute and  the  personal  reconciled  in  Christ. 

Atheism  is  the  ultimate  point  to  which  pantheism  tends.     Both 
may  be  said  to  lie  in  the  same  plane.     But  the  one  is  not  to  be 

*  Life  of  Arnold,  vol,  ii.  p.  1. 


24  PANTHEISM  ;    OIlj 

confounded  with  the  other.  The  atheist  denies  the  primal  truth 
that  God  is.  The  pantheist,  on  the  other  hand,  admits  it.  It  is  in 
fact  with  him  the  sum  and  substance  of  all  truth,  or  rather  the  one 
gi-eat  truth  in  the  universe.  The  atheist  sees  God  nowhere,  the 
pantheist  sees  Him  everywhere.  The  one  looks  upon  a  world  won- 
drously  fair  and  sublime,  every  department  of  which  is  bright  with 
intelligence,  and  resolves  the  whole  into  mere  mechanical  forces, 
and  thrusts  out,  by  a  denial  of  his  being,  the  all-pervading  energy 
of  nature's  God.  The  other  sees  God  really  shining  in  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  living  in  the  flowers  and  the  grass  of  the  field ; 
hears  Him  speaking  in  the  winds  and  waters,  in  the  songs  of  the 
inhabiters  of  the  grove,  and  in  the  deep  emotions  of  the  human  soul. 
The  atheist  looks  up  to  the  bright  heavens  and  around  on  tlie  varie- 
gated earth,  and  coolly  says,  There  is  natm-e,  but  no  God.  The  pan- 
theist points  to  all  the  glorious  forms  of  earth  and  sky,  and  exclaims 
with  something  like  enthusiasm,  There  is  God.  The  Divine  Being 
is  with  him  indeed  the  only  real  existence.  The  universe,  with 
its  multitudinous  forms  of  what  we  call  matter  and  mind,  is  only 
phenomenal.  Men  who  have  not  reached  the  utmost  bound  of 
infidelity  —  atheism,  or  who  have  not  come  so  far  within  sight 
of  it  as  pantheism,  conceive  of  the  Creator  as  entirely  distinct 
from  his  works,  though  incomjirehensibly  present  with  and  per- 
vading them.  But  the  pantheist  virtually  makes  of  the  twain 
one.  Nature  is  absorbed  in  Deity.  God  is  extended  beneatli  all 
that  exists,  thinks,  and  moves.  He  is  in  all  and  all  is  in  Him. 
The  pantheist  then  has  a  God,  and,  strictly  speaking,  he  has  no- 
thing else.  But  his  God  is  merely  an  infinite  substance,  a  vague 
immensity  —  the  one  essence  of  Being  extended  everywhere,  of 
which  man  and  all  other  existing  things  are  but  the  modes.  The 
world  and  all  the  fulness  thereof  mirrors  to  our  view  the  glory  of 
the  Infinite,  Personal,  and  Independent  One.  But  the  pantheist 
worships  the  mirror  itself,  and  sums  up  his  creed  by  saying  that 
all  is  God. 

Almost  every  fatal  dish  contains  food  as  well  as  poison.  Every 
eiTor  in  religion  lies  upon  or  side  by  side  with  some  truth.  Pan- 
theism has  within  it  an  element  of  godliness,  but,  like  the  food  in 
the  fatal  dish,  it  is  overborne  and  rendered  destructive  by  the  ele- 
ment of  evil.  Or  rather,  pantheism  looks  like  a  good  principle 
severed  from  another  which  is  necessary  to  keep  it  sound  and 
healthy,  and  in  its  isolated  state  transformed  into  a  bad  principle. 
The  principle  to  which  we  allude  is  the  omnipresence  and  all- 
pervading  energy  of  the  Creator  and  Governor  of  tlie  universe. 
It  is  a  truth,  the  vivid  recognition  of  which  is  essential  to  piety, 
that  God  is  everywhere  present  throughout  the  vast  creation.  All 
nature  is  full  of  Him.  The  luminaries  of  heaven  and  the  flowers 
of  earth,  the  perpetual  hills,  and  the  wide  sea  where  go  the  ships, 
the  various  animal  tribes,  and  intelligent  man,  the  noblest  of  all, 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  25 

proclaim  the  presence  of  the  living  God.  It  might  he  thoiiglit 
that  poetry  has  carried  this  principle  too  far  vrhen  it  represents  God 
as  shining  in  the  snn,  whispering  in  the  winds,  clothing  Himself 
with  clouds  and  storms,  and  speaking  in  the  rational  nature  of  man. 
But  such  poetry  is  not  necessarily  pantheistic.  It  is  just  an  em 
hodiment  in  living  words  of  sentiments  and  emotions  that  burn 
more  or  less  in  the  bosom  of  every  man  who  is  susceptible  of  the 
infliisnces  that  come  upon  him  from  every  department  of  nature. 
These  influences  tend  to  raise  the  mind  from  nature  up  to  nature's 
God,  and  such  is  the  tendency  of  much  of  the  jwetry  to  which  we 
allude.  The  morning  orison  which  Milton  puts  into  the  mouth 
of  Adam  and  Eve  in  Paradise,  the  hymn  which  Thomson  raises  to 
the  God  of  the  Seasons,  or  Coleridge's  "  Hymn  before  Sunrise  in 
the  Vale  of  Chamounis,"have  no  tendency  whatever  to  produce  or 
strengthen  pantheistic  feelings;  because  however  much  they  clothe 
with  living  attributes  the  grand  and  lovely  forms  of  nature,  they 
never  absorb  God  in  these  forms,  but  rise  from  the  visible  to  the 
Invisible,  and  make  "earth  with  her  thousand  voices"  praise  a 
living,  personal,  and  absolutely  perfect  God.  In  the  last  nobla 
hymn  which  we  have  mentioned,  the  whole  of  Alpine  nature  is 
grandly  personified,  but  all  its  utterances  rise,  "  like  a  cloud  of 
incense,"  to  Him  who  in  his  glorious  personality  existed  before 
the  mountains  were  brought  forth  or  ever  He  had  foimed  the  earth 
and  the  world.  It  is  this  latter  principle,  the  principle  of  per- 
sonality, that  the  pantheist  sinks  or  loses  sight  of  The  world, 
so  to  speak,  is  full  of  vitalities.  God  is  present  in  them  in  the 
immensity  of  his  essence  whereby  He  filleth  all  things.  That 
is  a  true  devotional  principle.  God  is  nevertheless  as  distinct  from 
them  as  the  soul  of  man  is  distinct  from  his  body.  That  is  an- 
other trae  devotional  principle.  Both  must  be  held  fast  in  order 
to  our  having  right  views  of  the  relation  subsisting  between  the 
Infinite  and  the  linite,  the  Divine  nature  and  the  divinely-created 
and  divinely-sustained  universe.  Seize  hold  of  the  former  principle 
and  let  go  the  latter,  recognise  a  divinity  in  the  vitalities  which 
appear  in  the  world  around  you,  but  withhold  your  recognition  of 
a  divinity  essentially  distinct  from  these  vitalities,  and  what 
have  you  but  these  collective  vitalities  for  a  God.  This  is  pan- 
theism. 

Pantheism  and  polytheism  are  in  fact  but  a  higher  and  a  lowei', 
a  more  refined  and  a  more  vulgar  way,  which  men  have  taken 
when  they  have  ceased  to  walk  in  a  spiritual  relatiouihip  vrith 
God.=;:     Their  idea  of  Him  — 


who  sittetli  above  these  heaveins 


To  us  invisible,  or  dimly  seen 
In  these  his  lowest  works," 


See  Tholuck  on  the  Nature  anu  Moral  lufluenoe  of  KetUhcnisjM,  jt.  hi. 


2G  PANTHEISM  ;    OBj 

has  lost  its  vivid  spiiituality,  and  they  liave  fallen  from  high  con- 
verse with  the  Creator  down  to  the  creation  itself.  In  such  a  case, 
the  more  learned  and  philosophic,  who  were  not  prepared  to  take 
tlie  leap  to  absolute  atheism,  would  no  longer  regard  the  life  and 
thought  that  appear  in  the  visible  world  as  merely  manifestations 
of  the  presence  and  agency  of  the  Great  Spirit,  but  as  modes  or 
niodiiications  of  the  Divine  essence.  Those,  on  the  other  hand, 
"whose  thoughts  proud  science  never  taught  to  stray,"  v.'ho  had 
little  or  nothing  of  the  specidative  temperament,  and  who  could 
not  grasp  the  idea  of  one  gTeat  whole,  would  see  a  distinct  deity  in 
every  diffsrent  department  of  nature.  The  one  beheld  the  same 
infinite  substance  under  all  mental  and  material  phenomena. 
AYhat  are  called  powers  of  nature  or  secondary  causes,  all  of  which 
are  controlled  by  the  supreme  Intelligent  Cause,  would  be  regarded 
by  the  speculatist  as  so  many  modes  of  the  infinitely-extended 
One.  The  collective  energies  and  agencies  of  the  visible  world,  in 
his  estimation,  constituted  God.  And  thus  he  became  a  pantheist. 
The  other  class,  less  comprehensive  and  vigorous  in  mind,  looked 
at  creation  in  its  smaller  divisions,  and  recognising  a  distinct 
energy  in  every  difierent  kind  of  phenomena,  assigned  a  distinct 
divinity  to  the  hills  and  to  the  vallies,  to  the  woods  and  to  the 
waters,  and  thus  became  polytheists.  Pantheism  and  polytheism, 
however  mucli  they  diverge  the  one  from  the  other,  are  to  be  traced 
up  to  the  tendency  in  the  depraved  mind,  in  its  estrangement  from 
the  High  and  Holy  One,  to  confound  God  with  nature,  and  to  lose 
the  pin-e  spiritual  world  in  the  phenomenal  and  visible.  The 
reluctance  or  incapacity  of  men  to  retain  God  in  tJieir  knowledge 
as  a  Person,  self  existent  and  independent,  lies  at  the  bottom  of 
both.  The  one  is  the  fruit  of  a  speculative  philosophy,  the  other 
is  the  gi'osser  manifestation  of  the  same  corrupt  tendency,  \inre- 
fmed  and  iniarrested  by  the  influence  of  the  schools  or  the  higher 
influence  of  Christianity. 

It  is  this  very  comprehensiveness,  this  embracing  nature  of  its 
principles,  which  distinguishes  pantheism  from  polytheism,  that 
renders  it  in  Christian  lands  the  most  dangerous  foe  to  Chris- 
tianity. "Never  did  a  philosophical  system  take  such  an  attitude 
towards  the  Christian  faith;  it  does  not  make  it  a  superstition,  as 
did  atheism;  it  does  not  neglect  it  as  does  our  popular  pliilosophy; 
it  does  not  scout  its  mysteries,  as  does  an  irrational  common- 
sense;  nor  does  it  attenuate  it  into  a  mere  ethical  system  :  but  it 
grants  it  to  be  the  highest  possible  form  of  man's  religious  nature, 
it  strives  to  transform  its  gi-andest  truths  into  philosophical  prin- 
ciples ;  it  says  tliat  only  one  thing  is  higher,  and  that  is  pan- 
theism." =1=  There  is  no  fear  of  men  becoming  polytheists  in  a 
country  where  paganism  lias  been  rooted  out,  and  the  influences 
of  th«  Gospel  have  been  deejily  and  extensively  felt.     But  pan- 

*  smith's  Eelations  of  Faith  and  Philosophv,  p.  11, 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVTNE    PEESONALll  V.  2't 

theism  flourishes  in  the  very  heart  of  comniunities  called  Chris- 
tian, and  coils  its  pliant  form  around  the  very  faith  whose  author 
and  finisher  is  the  Brightness  of  the  Father's  glory  and  the  express 
Image  of  His  Person.  The  coil  indeed  is  fatal :  for  however  fair 
to  look  upon  may  he  the  sinuous  folds,  it  poisons  the  truth,  and 
destroys  everything  that  is  distinctively  Christian.  "  It  weaves  its 
subtle  dialectics  around  everything,  that  thus  it  may  drag  all  into 
its  terrific  vortex.  It  has  a  word  for  almost  every  man,  excepting 
for  the  Christian  established  in  his  faith.  By  the  very  extrava- 
gance of  its  pretensions  it  seduces  many;  by  its  harmony  with 
the  life  of  sense  it  attracts  those  who  love  the  world ;  and  by  its 
ideal  character  it  sways  such  as  would  fain  be  lifted  above  the 
illusions  of  sense  and  the  visions  of  imagination,  and  the  contra- 
dictions of  the  understanding,  into  a  region  of  rarer  air,  where 
reason  sways  a  universal  sceptre.  Its  system  includes  all  things. 
God  is  all  things;  or  rather  all  is  God;  he  that  knows  this  system 
knows  and  has  God."=.'^  It,  accordingly,  has  its  attractions  for  all 
men  who  have  ceased  to  walk  in  communion  with  the  living  per- 
sonal God,  and  who  yet  feel  the  want  of  something  in  the  shape 
of  religious  faith.  The  philosopher  revels  in  it  as  in  a  region  of 
boundless  speculation  ;  the  poet  and  the  artist  find  therein  a 
beautiful  dwelling-place  where  they  can  wander  at  their  own  sweet 
will ;  and  the  half-thinking  artisan  is  pleased  wdth  a  creed  which 
interferes  so  little  with  material  interests,  and  summons  him  so 
seldom  to  look  at  things  unseen  and  eternal.  Many  such  persons, 
in  our  day,  are  pantheists. 

Pantheism  is  not,  however,  a  thing  of  yesterday.  It  has,  in  its 
essence,  existed  in  all  ages.  Some  would  persuade  us  that  it  is  the 
latest  result  of  human  experience,  a  resting-place  for  the  long- 
tossed  mind,  reserved  for  us  upon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world 
have  come.  But  it  is  not  so.  Infidelity  in  our  times  is  throwing 
up  nothing  but  what  has  been  thrown  up  before.  Its  difierent 
forms  are  only  old  idols  in  new  positions  and  an-ayed  in  modern 
garbs.  "  In  e'^^ery  form  of  it,  it  has  its  ancestry,  and  it  must  not  ask 
now  to  be  spoken  to  as  if  we  had  not  already,  and  long  ago,  made 
acquaintance  with  it  "■)-  "  Heresies,"  says  Sir  Thomas  Browne, 
"  are  like  the  river  Arethusa,  though  they  lose  their  currents  in 
one  place,  they  rise  up  again  in  another."  "VVe  meet  with  pan- 
theism in  the  speculative  philosophy  of  the  ancient  world.  It  has 
been  tlie  faith  of  millions  in  India  from  a  remote  antiquity  down 
to  the  present  day.  Spinoza  in  the  seventeenth  century,  and 
Schelling,  and  Hegel  in  the  nineteenth,  have  only  systematized 
and  reduced  to  a  severe  logical  form  what  had  been  floating  else- 
Avhere  for  ages  before.  This  was  substantially  the  docti'iue  of  tho 
Eleatic?.     They  speculated  on  the  great  problem  of  existence,  and 

*  Smith's  Relations  of  Faith  and  Philosophy,  p.  11. 
+  The  Kestoration  of  Belief,  p.  15. 


28  pa:<theisji;  on, 

fjidcavoured  to  resolve  those  mysteries  which  have  baflfied  tl)e 
Iniman  uuderstaiiding  in  every  age.  Zeno,  the  most  distinguished 
philosopher  of  this  scliool,  maintained  tliat  there  was  but  one  real 
existence  in  the  universe,  that  all  other  things  were  merely  phe- 
nomenal, being  only  modifications  or  appearances  of  the  Great 
One  which  existed  as  a  substratum  beneath  the  whole.  Pantheism, 
indeed,  has  appeared  in  all  nations  where  there  have  been  minds 
of  a  speculative  cast,  ignorant  of,  or  in  a  great  measure  uninflu- 
enced by  the  revelation  of  Christ.  It  seems  "to  be  the  joint  product 
of  an  estrangement  from  God,  the  eternal  and  independent  I  A:\r, 
and  an  effort  to  comprehend  the  essence  of  things  and  the  7iexiis 
which  unites  the  Infinite  with  the  finite,  the  phenomena  of  nature 
vv'ith  the  cause  of  all  that  phenomena.  The  very  same  doctrine 
forms  substantially  the  creed  of  some  Hindoo  sects  in  the  present 
day.  India  has  had  its  philosophies  and  has  them  still.  And 
pantheism  is  the  common  form  which  speculations  on  the  mys- 
teries of  existence  have  there  assumed,  unrestrained  as  these 
speculations  have  been  in  the  absence  of  the  Gospel.  Hindooism 
and  Buddhism  are  but  philosophies  of  religion.  The  priests  may 
have  been  the  speculatists,  but  the  system  has  found  a  spontaneous 
welcome  with  the  people  who  were  too  dull  of  apprehension  to  rise 
to  the  thought  of  a  pure  spiritual  Intelligence,  and  too  alive  to  a 
sense  of  dependence  to  say  there  is  no  God.  Tlie  author  of  the 
"  Recollections  of  British  India,"  speaking  of  a  philosophical  sect 
called  the  Gosains,  tells  us  that,  "  in  common  v>^ith  the  Buddhists, 
they  believe  that  the  Divine  Being  is  not  separate  from,  but  iii 
Himself  the  universe,  so  that  all  its  constituent  parts  are  but  parts 
of  Himself.  The  different  deities,  therefore,  are  merely  portions  of 
the  same  essential  Godhead."  This  coiToborates  what  has  been 
said  of  the  connection  between  pantheism  and  polytheism,  and 
reminds  us  of  the  old  doctrine  of  the  Stoics,  according  to  which 
tlie  spirit  pervades  the  whole  world  as  the  substratum  of  its  acti- 
vity, and  receives  from  men  various  designations  according  to  the 
different  phenomena  which  it  animates.  There  is,  indeed,  a  striking 
coincidence  between  the  One  substratum  of  the  Eleatics,  the  Brahm 
of  the  Hindoo,  and  the  World-spirit  of  the  modern  German.-- 

Germany,  of  all  the  countries  of  modern  Europe,  is  the  most 
prolific  soil  of  pantheism.  And  it  is  imported  from  thence  into 
our  own  among  other  European  states.  It  is  the  native  fruit  of 
iK'-r  meta])hysics.  The  mental  habitudes  of  her  people  are  pecu- 
liarly thoughtful  and  reflective.  Pliilosophy,  not  the  inductive  and 
experiuiental  as  with  us,  but  the  speculative  and  idealistic,  is 
natural  to  the  German  mind.  Her  schools  liave  been  absorbed  in 
discussing  the  same  great  questions  which  were  discussed  over 
and  over  agxin  in  the  schools  of  tlie  ancients.  Those  mysterious 
])robl©ms  v/hich  regard  the  principles  of  things,  the  existence  and 

*  Di-.  Yanghan's  Age  and  Christianity,  p.  2-55. 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  20 

nature  of  God,  the  relations  between  Him  and  the  nnirerse,  and 
the  origin  of  human  knowledge,  —  problems  on  the  solution  of 
which  the  gi-eatest  minds  in  past  ages  have  been  employed  with  so 
little  profit,  —  possess  a  peculiar  charm  for  the  philosophers  of  the 
Continent.  There  is  this  important  difference,  however,  between 
the  pantheism  of  the  old  world  and  that  of  the  new,  between  that 
of  ancient  Greece  and  India,  and  that  of  modern  Germany :  the 
one  sprung  up  and  flourished  in  the  absence  of  an  authoritative 
revelation  from  heaven,  while  the  other  has  risen  and  spread  in 
contempt  of  it.  The  German  has  become  a  pantheist  with  the 
Bible  in  his  hand,  and  his  foot  in  the  birth-place  of  the  Eeform- 
ation.  He  has  refused  to  follow,  humbly  and  submissively,  that 
light  that  has  come  into  the  world,  and  which  alone  has  hitherto 
conducted  individuals  or  communities  to  rest. 

The  German  philosophy — a  philosophy  which  seeks  to  reach  the 
one  originating  principle  of  all  things  —  has  been  carried  into  the 
region  of  theology,  and  there  borne  its  bitter  fruit.  Spinoza  has 
been  justly  regarded  as  the  father  of  modern  pantheism.  He,  by  a 
stern  logic,  fully  developed  the  system  of  Descartes.  The  illus- 
trious Frenchman  had  endeavoured  to  demonstrate  the  existence 
of  God  from  the  phenomena  of  consciousness.  The  position  he 
assumed  was,  that  whatever  consciousness  clearly  proclaims  must 
be  true.  Descartes,  in  short,  derived  existence  from  thought. 
Spinoza  identified  them,  and  referred  both  to  the  one  Infinite 
Substance  of  which  everything  else  is  a  mode  or  manifestation. 
According  to  his  logic,  God  is  the  only  reality  in  the  universe,  tha 
one  universal  existence  that  underlies  all  other  existences,  so 
that  everything  is  in  and  from  God.  The  distinction  between 
the  Creator  and  His  works  was  thus  annihilated,  and  the 
system  of  pantheism  became  complete.  Others  had  held  it 
as  a  vague  dreamy  doctrine,  but  Spinoza  was  the  first  to  give  it 
a  rigid  logical  form.  It  is  remarkable  that  he,  too,  in  a,  j)as- 
sage  in  his  posthumous  works,  has  anticipated  some  of  the 
disciples  of  the  Hegelian  school  in  their  interpretation  of  th© 
great  doctrines  of  the  Bible.  "  I  tell  you,"  says  he  in  a  letter  to 
Oldenburgh,  "that  it  is  not  necessary  for  your  salvation,  that  you 
should  believe  in  Christ  according  to  the  flesh  ;  but  of  that  eternal 
Son  of  God,  that  is,  the  eternal  wisdom  of  God,  which  is  mani- 
fested in  all  things,  but  especially  in  the  human  mind  and  most 
of  all  in  Jesus  Christ,  we  must  cherish  a  very  different  opinion. "'i^ 
It  is  the  philosophy  of  Spinoza,  propounded  in  the  seventeenth 
century,  and  diffused  over  the  Continent  ever  since  by  his  writings, 
that  has  given  the  greatest  impulse  to  the  speculative  mind  of 
Germany,  and  produced  that  wide-spread  pantheism  so  charac- 
teristic of  German  s})eculations.  Schelling  and  Hegel,  whose 
names  ai*e  identified  with  the  pantheism  of  the  nineteenth  century, 

*  Lewes  s  Biogi-aphical  Histoid  of  Philosophy,  toI.  iii.  p.  12.j. 


30  pantheism;  or, 

are  the  fiuit  of  his  lahoiu'S.  They  liave  refined  and  carried  out 
the  system  to  \vhich  Spinoza  gave  the  form.  In  both  of  these 
philosophic  leaders,  we  see  a  thorough  contempt  for  what  is  induc- 
tive and  experimental,  the  method  by  which  Newton  attained  an 
unprecedented  eminence  in  physical  science,  and  Locke  rose  to 
such  high  distinction  in  the  science  of  mind.  The  treasures  of 
knowledge  which  observation  contributes  are  professedly  discarded 
by  them,  and  those  which  abstract  reason  furnishes  are  exclusively 
valued.  The  evidence  from  design,  which  has  been  so  fully  illus- 
irated  by  our  ov/n  writers  on  natural  theology,  and  which  is  so 
patent  to  the  eyes  of  all  men,  is  set  at  nought  by  the  heads  and 
disciples  of  this  school.  And  they  pretend  to  prove  all  existence 
by  laying  down  a  priori  axioms,  and  starting  from  them  in  a  course 
of  stern  logical  argumentation.  By  this  process,  Fichte,  who 
preceded  the  two  philosophers  referred  to,  brought  to  a  fatal  con- 
summation what  is  called  Subjective  Idealism.  Nature  and  God 
in  his  philosophy  vanished.  Self  became  the  solitary  existence  in 
the  universe,  and  the  creator  of  everything  else  human  and  divine. 
The  moral  order  of  the  world  was  all  that  was  left  for  the  world's 
God,  and  the  philosopher  stood  on  the  very  brinlc  of  absolute 
atheism.  From  this  the  mind  of  Germany  shrunk  back ;  and 
Schelling  reproduced,  in  an  attractive  form,  the  pantheistic  system, 
the  tendency  towards  which  is  so  strong  in  the  great  Fatherland. 
He  identified  the  subject  and  the  object,  and  inade  them  mani- 
festations of  God  or  the  Absolute.  Nature  with  him  is  but  the 
self-development  of  Deity.  The  whole  phenomena  of  the  universe 
have  proceeded  in  one  strict  chain  of  necessary  evolution.  And 
God  has  only  come  to  realize  Himself,  and  attain  self-conscious- 
ness, in  man.  Everything,  according  to  this  system,  exists  in 
God,  and  He  is  of  necessity  the  All  One.  The  system,  in  so  far 
as  it  is  intelligible,  proclaimed  the  universe  to  be  God.  There 
was,  however,  another  step  to  be  taken  before  tlie  climax  was 
reached,  and  that  step  was  boldly  taken  by  Hegel.  He  denied  the 
existence  of  both  subject  and  object,  and  left  only  a  imiverse  of 
relations.  Everything  with  him  is  a  process  of  thought,  and  God 
himself  is  the  whole  process.  The  Deity  is  not  a  self-existent 
reality,  but  a  never-ending  self-discession,  which  never  realizes 
itself  so  fully  as  in  the  human  consciousness.  Creation,  according 
to  this,  is  not  a  single  act,  but  God  is  necessarily  ever  creating. 
The  pantheism  of  the  Hegelian  system  is  obvious  amid  much  of 
tlic  mysticism  that  shrouds  it.  Natme  is  absorbed  in  God,  and 
God  and  the  universe,  whatever  they  be,  are  identified.  By  this 
same  process  of  pure  philosophic  thought,  Hegel  pretended  to 
deduce  the  whole  of  doctrinal  Christianity  Schelling  before  him 
had  made  the  Gospel  revelation  one  of  the  modes  in  which  God  is 
manifesting  Himself  in  history.  But  Hegel,  by  his  philosophy, 
transformed  Christianity  into  a  system  of  regularly  evolved  ideas, 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  31 

the  value  of  which  is  altogether  independent  of  historical  testi- 
mony. 

It  is  at  this  point  that  David  Frederick  Strauss  and  his  school 
appear.  He  has  put  on  the  Hegelian  armour,  taken  his  stand  in 
the  very  heart  of  the  Christian  theology,  scattered  into  air  the  gi'and 
sbjective  element  of  the  Gospel,  and  left  nothing  remaining  except 
a  few  religious  ideas  or  conceptions  of  the  mind.  He  is,  strictly 
speaking,  neither  a  rationalist  nor  a  supernaturalist.  He  disavows 
all  connection  with  either,  and  proclaims  war  against  both.  He 
is,  however,  a  pantheist  in  the  extreme.  He  represents  the  far 
left  of  the  Hegelian  party,  and  stands  on  the  very  verge  of  atheism, 
if  he  has  not  fallen  into  the  gulf  God  is  with  him  a  process  of 
thought  He  has  no  separate  individual  existence.  Apart  from 
the  universe,  or  out  of  that  process  which  is  alleged  to  he  eternally 
unfolding  itself  and  which  attains  the  highest  state  of  consciousness 
in  the  mind  of  the  philosopher  himself  there  is  no  God.  No  room 
whatever  is  left  in  the  system  for  the  intervention  of  a  personal 
God,  and  in  the  system  a  personal  God  has  no  existence.  Hence 
his  mythical  theory.  The  historical  Christ  of  the  Gospels,  accord- 
ing to  him,  was  the  personified  ideas  of  the  church.  The  Divine 
Jiedeemer  was  a  process,  a  personality  gradually  formed  out  of 
elements  contributed  by  Old  Testament  history,  rabbinical  tradi- 
tion, and  the  state  of  the  popular  mind  at  the  time  when  the  Mes- 
siah was  expected.  In  other  words,  Christ  was  the  creation  of  the 
church,  not  the  founder  of  it.  Such  a  person  as  Jesus,  it  is  ad- 
mitted, lived  and  died,  who  believed  Himself  to  be  the  Christ. 
Strauss  recognised  a  small  historical  element  in  the  person  of 
Jesus,  a  land  of  skeleton  which  the  church  gradually  clothed 
with  flesh  and  blood,  the  distinguishing  attributes  of  which  were 
an  investment  thrown  around  it  from  the  mind  of  the  chm'ch 
itself  The  fully  developed  Christ  of  the  Gospel,  was  thus  made  the 
embodied  aggi-egate  of  the  conceptions  of  the  first  Christians  and 
the  thoughts  of  the  past.  Tliis  is  the  latest  shape,  Avith  the  excep- 
tion perhaps  of  Feuerbach's,  which  German  infidelity  has  assumed, 
the  extreme  point  to  which  pantheism  has  been  carried,  and  where 
it  becomes  almost,  if  not  altogether,  identical  with  atheism.  It 
leaves  no  God,  but  a  vague  personification  of  human  conscious- 
ness. The  existence  of  a  divine  consciousness  separate  from  the 
human  is  ignored.  It  sweeps  the  world  clean  of  an  historical 
Christianity.  It  binds  up  all  the  physical  and  moral  movements  of 
the  world  in  one  unbroken  chain  of  necessary  development.  And 
having  left  no  Supreme  and  Independent  object  of  worship,  it  takes 
away  the  Bible,  and  presents  us  with  nothing  in  its  room  but 
mythological  ideas  embellishing  the  shadow  of  a  reality.  Pan- 
theism in  Germany  wiU  be  found,  then,  like  other  forms  of  infi- 
delity, to  have  a  variety  of  shades,  so  that  those  who  stand  at  the 
one  extreme  may  hold  some  opinions  that  are  denied  by  tliose  who 


32  pantheism;  or, 

stand  at  the  other.  Hegel  himself  was  unquestionably  a  pantheist, 
though  it  maybe  doubted  if  he  would  have  gone  the  length  of  liis 
bold  and  admiring  disciple  Strauss.  But  Spinoza,  the  founder  of 
this  philosophy,  and  Schelling,  Hegel,  Strauss,  and  others,  who 
have  developed  it,  agree  in  this  that  they  sink  the  personality  of 
God.^:- 

Pantheism  is  not,  however,  restricted  to  the  schools  and  lite- 
rature of  Germany.  The  existing  French  philosophy  is  by  no 
means  clear  of  it.  While  there  is  reason  to  apprehend  that,  in  its 
most  unphilosophic  form,  it  constitutes  the  faith  of  a  large  portion 
of  the  French  people.  The  system  of  Cousin,  who  is  regarded  as 
the  founder  and  coiyphseus  of  the  modern  eclectic  school  of  France, 
has  met  with  much  opposition  from  various  writers  on  account  of 
its  pantheistic  leanings.  He  holds  the  balance,  as  Dr.  Chalmers 
has  remarked,  between  the  two  philosophies  of  Germany  and  Scot- 
land, neither  being  exclusively  ontological  as  the  former,  nor  exclu- 
sively psychological  as  the  latter.  His  idealism,  modified  though 
it  be^  has  led  him,  however,  in  a  pantheistic  direction.  And  though 
he  repels  the  charge  of  pantheism,  yet  what  other  interpretation 
can  be  put  on  his  language,  when  he  speaks  of  God  as  "  being 
absolute  cause,  one  and  many,  eternity  and  time,  essence  and  life, 
end  and  middle,  at  the  summit  of  existence  and  at  its  base,  infinite 
and  finite  together;  in  a  word,  a  Trinity,  being  at  the  same  time 
God,  Nature,  and  Humanity."  Mr.  Morell,  an  admirer  of  Cousin's 
genius,  justly  remarks,  when  commenting  on  his  view  of  the 
.Divinity:  "  even  if  we  admit  that  it  is  not  a  doctrine,  like  that  of 
Spinoza,  which  identifies  God  with  the  abstract  idea  of  substance; 
or  even  like  that  of  Hegel,  whicli  i-egards  Deity  as  synonymous 
with  the  absolute  law  and  process  of  the  universe  ;  if  we  admit,  in 
fact,  that  the  Deity  of  Cousin  possesses  a  conscious  personality, 
yet  still  it  is  one  which  contains  in  itself  the  finite  personality  and 
consciousness  of  every  subordinate  mind.  God  is  the  ocean — we 
are  but  the  v/aves;  the  ocean  may  be  one  individuality,  and  each 
wave  another;  but  still  they  are  essentialhj  one  and  the  same."f — 
Here  we  have  the  very  notion  of  Deity  which  is  developed  in  much 
of  the  current  literature  of  the  day,  and  which  leads  to  a  system  of 
man-worship.  The  finite  is  an  emanation  or  portion  of  the  infinite. 
The  universe  is  comprehended  in  God.  Men's  souls  are  divine. 
Every  man  is  an  incarnation  of  Deity.  All  existences  are  in  God, 
and  God  is  in  all  existences.! 

*  Morell's  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  chap.  v.  sect.  2.      +  Ibid.  pp.  .502,  .511. 

+  It  is  but  just  to  admit,  what  Cousin  stoutly  contends  for,  that  his  system  is 
uol  identical  with  that  of  Spinoza  and  the  Eleatics.  "  I  must  remind  my  adver- 
nari«H5,"  says  he,  "that  the  God  of  Spinoza  and  the  Eleatics  is  a  pure  substance, 
and  not  a  cause.  In  the  system  of  Spinoza,  creation  is  impossible  •  in  mine  it  is 
Meeessary."  But  when  he  tells  us  that  "  if  God  be  not  everything.',  He  isnotliing-; 
— that  everywhere  present,  He  returns,  as  it  were,  to  Himself  in  the  consciousness 
ef  man,"— who  eaa  wonder  if  it  be  looked  upon  as  pantheism  of  another  phase  ? 
See  e»usiii'»  Phil.  Essays,  (Clark's  edition, 1  pp.  22,  77. 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PEESONALITY.  33 

But  the  veil  of  mysticism  which  shrouds  the  pantheism  of  the 
schools,  and  often  renders  its  language  hard  to  he  understood,  is 
removed  from  the  ^san theism  of  the  people.  The  socialism  of  the 
Continent  is,  in  a  great  measure,  pantheistic.  The  masses,  who 
are  incapable  of  following  the  philosopher  in  his  metaphysical 
investigations,  readily  aiDprehend  their  results  when  popularized, 
and  brought  within  the  sphere  of  man's  interests  and  duties. 
This  is  done  by  the  socialist  propaganda.  And  however  much  the 
various  sects  of  socialism  war  with  each  other  on  points  of  polity, 
they  are  generally  of  one  mind  in  regard  to  man-worship.  Amid 
the  late  revolutions  which  shook  •continental  Europe,  it  was  not 
difficult  to  see  the  divinity  to  whom  the  clouds  of  incense  arose. 
That  the  highest  being  is  man,  was  the  dogma  commonly  taught 
and  cordially  received.  In  France,  the  teaching  of  Pierre  Leroux, 
who  has  been  counted  the  metaphysician  of  socialism,  was  undis- 
guised pantheism.  He  knows  of  no  God  distinct  from  the  universe 
of  being.  And  humanity  with  liim  is  but  the  incarnation  of 
divinity.  The  tendency,  in  short,  of  all  the  socialist  sects  in 
France,  notwithstanding  the  religious  sentimentalism  of  the  lan- 
guage of  some  of  their  leaders,  is  towards  pantheism.  Hence 
their  declamations  on  the  perfectibihty  of  the  human  race,  and 
their  exclusion  of  all  motive  power  but  the  human  will.  God, 
accordiag  to  them,  was  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  so  he  is  in  the  French 
people.  And  this  is  the  faith  which  has  supplanted  the  infidelity 
of  Voltau-e  in  tlie  heart  of  the  nation.  The  diseased  patient  is 
perpetually  turning  himself  on  the  same  bed,  seeking  rest  and 
finding  none.  The  coimnunism  of  Germany  is  rampant  with  the 
same  eleuient.  Feuerbach,  who  is  the  chief  teacher  of  the  more 
advanced  form  of  socialism,  has  deilied  the  human  race.  According 
to  him  God  is  not  a  being  above  man,  but  God  is  to  be  found  in 
man.  Eeligion  is  not  a  thing  that  comes  to  man  from  without;, 
but  the  whole  contents  of  religion  are  derived  from  human  nature 
itself  Man  thus  becomes  a  god  to  himself  Theology  becomes 
anthropology.  And  pantheism  reaches  the  pomt  to  which  it  is 
ever  tending,  the  very  verge  of  atheism.  Such  has  been,  and  is 
in  a  great  measure  still,  the  faith  of  immense  multitudes  of  people 
on  the  Continent,  in  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century.  And 
if  there  is  one  lesson  more  impressively  taught  than,  another  by 
the  recent  commotions,  amid  which  such  gross  infidelity  was 
thrown  up,  it  is  that  such  a  faith  can  never  give  rest  and  happiness 
to  the  nations  of  the  world. 

Pantheism  among  ourselves  is  somewhat  of  an  exotic.  The 
sturdy  English  mind  is  not  the  most  congenial  soil  for  it.  The 
philosophy  irom  which  it  lias  sprung,  is  alien  to  the  mental  habi- 
tudes of  our  people.  But  if  it  does  not  exist  as  an  intellectual 
system  in  our  schools,  or  widely  prevail  in  the  communistic  foim 

u 


34  PAiNTHEISM  ,    OK, 

among  the  masses,  it  has  been  miported  into  our  literature  in  the 
most  alhiring  guise,  and  is  destined,  we  think,  to  prove  for  a  whilo 
the  great  foe  of  Bible  Christianity. 

In  some  of  the  transatlantic  j'^roductions  which  are  circulating 
among  us,  we  meet  with  the  system  in  its  poetic  or  most  attractive 
form.  The  Emerson  school,  which  numbers  many  disciples  in  our 
land,  is  unquestionably  pantheistic.  Emerson  himself,  with  all 
his  gorgeous  mysticism,  is  a  pantheist.  Man-worship  is  the  phi- 
losophy which  pervades  his  speculations.  He  comes  before  the 
Avorld  as  a  reformer.  And  whether  he  addresses  a  class  of  divinity 
students,  or  the  members  of  a  literary  society,  or  a  mechanics* 
association,  the  one  prominent  doctrine  in  his  orations  is  the  soul 
of  man.  Emerson -finds  everything  in  man,  and  he  wages  war 
with  all  systems  that  lead  mau  out  of  himself  for  an  object  of  faitlr 
and  worship.  His  complaint  is  that  "  the  soul  is  not  preached." 
The  doctrine  of  the  soul,  "  first  soul ;  and  second,  soul ;  and  ever- 
more, soul;"  is,  according  to  him,  the  grand  truth  that  is  to  rege- 
nerate the  world,  and  he  seems  to  consider  himself  commissioned 
to  promulgate  it.  He  boldly  denies  the  personality  of  God,  It  is 
the  "  theologic  cramp"  that  bound  Swedenborg,  one  of  his  favourite 
Representative  Men,  that  otherwise  "  colossal  soul."  After  the 
manner  of  some  of  the  German  Transcendentalists,  he  holds  the 
totality  of  being  to  be  God,  who  comes  to  self-consciousness  only 
in  the  individual  man.  "  The  universal  does  not  attract  us  until 
housed  in  an  individual.  Who  heeds  the  waste  abyss  of  possi- 
bility ?  The  ocean  is  everywhere  the  same,  but  it  has  no  character 
until  seen  with  the  shore  or  the  ship."  Man  is  at  once  the  wor- 
shipper and  the  object  of  worship.  "  Standing  on  the  bare  ground, 
my  head  bathed  by  the  blithe  air,  and  uplifted  into  infinite  space, 
all  mean  egotism  vanishes. — The  currents  of  the  Universal  Being 
circulate  through  me.  I  am  part  or  particle  of  God."  Prayer,  in 
perfect  consistency  with  these  notions,  is  shut  out.  "  It  is  God  in 
us  which  checks  the  language  of  petition  by  a  grander  thought." 
Historical  Christianity,  being  a  thing  from  without,  is  repudiated. 
Man  is  a  revelation  to  himself.  His  soul  becomes  the  fountain  of 
all  truth  and  goodness.  And  Emerson  and  his  school  comjilaiu 
that  "men  have  come  to  speak  of  tlie  revelation  as  somewhat  long 
ago  given  and  done,  as  if  God  were  dead."  The  first  defect  of 
Historical  Christianity  with  him  is,  tliat  it  "  dwells  with  noxious 
exaggeration  about  the  person  of  Jesus."  Eor  "  tlie  soul  knows  no 
persons."  Mr.  Emerson,  like  many  others  who  would  destroy  the 
doctrinal  system  of  the  great  Teacher,  professes  much  admiration 
ibr  Jesus  Christ.  He  is  no  longer  denounced  as  an  impostor.  He 
is  held  up  as  the  true,  the  model  man.  "  He  saw  with  open  eye 
the  mystery  of  the  soul. — Alone  in  all  history,  he  estimated  the 
vrreatupss  of  luan     Ope  man  v;n.:i  truo  to  what    is  in  vou  auci 


TilE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVIKE    PERSuN^LITY  £5 

me.  He  saw  that  God  incarnates  Himself  in  man,  and  evermore 
goes  forth  anew  to  take  jjossession  of  his  world.  He  said  in  this 
jubilee  of  sublime  emotion,  '  I  am  divine.  Through  me  God  acts; 
through  me,  speaks.  Would  you  see  God,  see  me;  or,  see  thee, 
when  thou  also  thinkcst  as  I  now  think.'  "  But  the  doctrine  of 
the  true  prophet  was  distorted,  and  jMr.  Emerson  tells  us  how, 
"  Because  the  indwelling  Supreme  Spirit  cannot  wholly  be  got  rid 
of,  the  doctrine  of  it  suffers  this  perversion,  that  the  divine  nature 
is  attributed  to  one  or  two  persons,  and  denied  to  all  the  rest,  and 
denied  with  fury."  —  Man,  in  short,  is  thus  made  the  highest  being. 
Every  human  soul  is  a  wave  in  the  ocean  of  divine  existence.  God 
is  the  whole  sea.  And  we  are  divine  or  a  part  of  God.  No  won- 
der then  that  man  refuses  to  receive  truth  at  second-hand,  and  is 
taught  to  believe  that  all  the  vii'tues  are  comprehended  in  self- 
trust.  Know  yourself,  reverence  yourself,  rely  upon  yourself,  are 
the  law  and  gospel  of  this  school  that  claijus  to  regenerate  the 
world.  In  this  strain  does  this  poetic  philosopher  discourse  to  the 
youth  connected  with  divinity  halls,  literary  societies,  and  me- 
chanics' institutes.  =;~ 

He  is  not  a  logician,  but  a  seer  ;  he  announces,  not  argues;  is 
the  language  of  an  admiring  editor  of  his  works.  This  witness  is 
true.  Seldom  or  never  does  anything  in  the  shape  of  an  argimieut 
cross  oiu'  path  in  reading  the  orations  and  essays  of  Emerson, 
He  dreams  and  dogmatizes.  All  his  responses  are  delivered  with 
oracular  authority.  "  I  stand  here  to  say.  Let  us  worship  the 
mighty  and  transcendant  soul."  He  is  im questionably  a  man  of 
genius,  endowed  with  exquisite  sensibilities  and  a  brilliant  fancy. 
His  style,  though  far  from  undefiled,  is  energetic  and  attractive. 
It  is  often,  however,  far  too  mystical  to  be  extensively  popular. 
He  is,  after  all  that  has  been  said  about  him,  a  dreamer,  a  glorious 
dreamer  if  you  will,  but  still  a  dreamer.  Such  seers  as  J\lr.  Emer- 
son have  been  in  the  world  before,  and  have  discoursed  to  young 
and  old,  as  he  has  done,  about  the  divinity  of  the  soul,  and  the 
duty  of  self-reliance,  and  what  tlie  better  has  the  world  been  for 
such  oracles?  History  attests  that  it  never  has  been  by  such 
dreamers  and  dreamy  systems  that  society  has  been  quickened  and 
regenerated  Look  at  the  Hebrew  prophets  who  ever  and  anon 
appeared,  filled  with  the  inspiring  Spuit,  to  rebuke  the  Israelites 
for  their  apostasy,  and  recall  them  to  the  service  of  the  living 
God.  Look  at  John,  the  harbinger  of  the  Messiah,  the  voice  of 
one  ciying  in  the  wilderness,  whose  teaching  was  so  influential 
and  impressive  for  good.  Look  at  Christ  Himself,  who  "  alone  in 
all  history,  estimated  the  greatness  of  man,"  and  for  whom  Emer- 
son and  his  disciples  profess  such  veneration,  and  where  in  all  his 
discourses  do  you  find  him  preaching  this  doctrine  of  the  soul, 
t<  lling  his  hearers  that  there  is  no  atheism  but  the  proposition  of 

♦  Sp?  Emereon's  Oro.tions  and  Efisavs,  ffissfm. 

i)2 


36  paj;theism;  or, 

depraTity,  that  they  are  parts  or  particles  of  God,  and  that  they 
ought  to  rely  upon  themselves  aud  act  a  godlike  part?  The  con- 
duct of  Judas  ^yas  honourahle  compared  with  such  attempts  to 
betray  the  Son  of  man  with  a  kiss.  Look  at  Paul  and  the  noble 
company  of  the  apostles,  men  who  turned  the  world  upside  down 
when  living,  and  who  being  dead  yet  speak,  and  in  vain  do  you 
seek  for  a  single  point  of  contact  between  theii-  doctrines,  which 
alone  have  been  instrumental  in  the  world's  regeneration,  and 
this  system  of  man-worship.  Look  at  all  the  mighty  throng,  be 
they  poets  or  philosophers,  statesmen  or  divines,  who,  by  the 
almost  universal  consent  of  mankind,  have  been  counted,  in  the 
highest  sense  of  the  expression,  reformers,  and  who  have  left  the 
salutary  impress  of  their  genius  and  labours  on  their  own  and 
succeeding  times,  and  which  of  them  ever  acted  on  the  belief  that 
in  one  soul,  in  any  soul,  are  resources  for  the  world,  and  that  the 
office  of  a  true  teacher  is  to  show  God  in  the  soul  ?  "  The  thing 
tiiat  hath  been,  it  is  that  which  shall  be."  The  world's  regenera- 
tion will  go  on  as  it  has  begun.  And  that  is  not  by  preaching  the 
pantheistic  doctrine  of  the  soul.  Go  to  the  heathenism  that  is 
abroad,  or  to  the  heathenism  tlmt  surrounds  us  at  home;  tell  the 
idolater  in  the  wilderness  who  di-inks  out  of  the  skulls  of  his 
enemies,  or  tell  the  convict  in  his  cell,  or  the  half  naked  v»Tetch  in 
bis  hovel,  that  his  soid  is  divine,  and  the  haggard  look  and  gi'ovel- 
ling  propensities  will  cry  out  that  the  doctrine  is  a  mockery  and  a 
lie.  But  the  disciples  of  this  school  never  venture  into  such  fields 
as  these.  Mr.  Emerson  tells  us  that  in  walking  abroad,  he  sees 
vegetables  and  trees  nodding  to  him,  and  he  nods  to  them.*  But 
he  meets  with  no  salutation  from  men  wh.^re,  if  true,  his  doctrine 
would  be  most  welcome.  It  is  only  among  the  di-eaming  men  and 
youth  in  cities  and  towns,  persons  who  iiave  a  love  for  the  half 
mystic  and  half  poetic,  persons  whose  religious  sentiments  are 
vague  and  undefined,  and  v/ho  are  disposed  to  be  gods  unto  them- 
selves, that  he  finds  worshippers  of  this  doctrine  of  the  soul. 
There  he  may  do  some  mischief.  But  neither  he  nor  any  of  his 
school  will  ever  by  any  witchery  of  language,  gain  an  ascendancy 
over  the  strong  English  mind.  And  of  two  things  they  may  be 
assured.  Historical  Christianity  will  ever  prove  too  mighty  for 
them.  It  has  overcome  vastly  more  powerful  enemies,  and  tra- 
velled on  in  the  greatness  of  its  strength.  And  tliis  system  of 
man-worship,  like  every  other,  will  miserably  fail  to  regenerate 
mankind.  The  diseased  patient  must  look  to  the  remedy  without. 
And  instead  of  being  mocked  by  the  cry,  look  to  yoiu'self,  hearken 
to  the  good  old  invitation,  "Beliold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world." f 

*  Emerson's  Nature. 

+  The  very  able  author  of  "  The  Restoration   of  Belief,"   in  initting  "  in   n, 
distinct  light  what  it  was  which  the  chiu-ch  of  the  early  age  did  for  mankind  in 


TITK    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PEESONALITY.  o7 

In  speaking  of  Mr.  Carlyle  in  this  connection,  we  are  to  be 
understood  rather  as  indicating  the  religious  bearing  of  much  of 
iiis  writings,  than  assigning  him  a  definite  place  in  a  particular 
category.     There  is  no  great  writer  in  modem  times  who  is  ever 
speaking  of  men's  beliefs  or  unbeliefs,  of  whom  it  is  more  difiicult 
to  say  precisely  what  his  own  belief  or  unbelief  is.     John  Foster 
once  said,  (whether  wisely  or  unwisely  we  leave  the  reader  to  judge,) 
that  it  would  at  any  time  be  a  great  luxury  to  him  to  accompany 
a  few  athletic  men  with  pole-axes  among  the  monuments  in  West- 
minster Abbey,  to  be  most  vigorously  wielded,  with  just  here  anl 
there  an  omission,  in  a  process  which  we  might  imagine.*     Mr. 
Carlyle   has  a  like  luxury  in   vigorously  wielding  his  pole-axe 
against  our  churches,  as 'if  they  were  "mere  cases  of  articles;" 
and   against   our  Bible  creeds,  as  if  they  were  no  better  than 
"extinct  traditions,"  " unbelievabilities,"  "worn-out  symbolisms, 
reminiscences,  and  simulacra,."     We  miglit  easily  conjecture  what 
Foster's  excepted  instances  among  the  sculptm-ed  memorials  would 
have  been,  but  we  are  without  ground  on  which  to  conjecture  the 
exceptions,  if  exceptions  there  be,  in  the  case  of  Carlyle.     Mul- 
titudes of  good  men  read  his  writings  v/ith  strong  suspicions  that, 
under  the   cover   of  assailing   the  shams,  hypocrisies,   and   for- 
malities, of  which  there  are  unhappily  too  many  in  the  church  as 
v>-ell  as  in  the  world,  he  is  assailing  the  very  Bible  truth  itself; 
and  these  suspicions  are  certainly  not  weakened  by  his  last  inter- 
esting work,  "  The  Life  of  John  Sterling."     We  know  that   he 
has  said,  "Adieu,  0  Church;  thy  road  is  that  way,  mine  is  this  : 
in  God's  name,  adieu!"     We  know  that  he  does  worship  in  "  the 
great  Cathedral  of  Immensity,"  and  acknowledges  "the  Supreme 
Silences,"  "  the  Destinies  and  the  Immensities,"  and  "  the  Eter- 
nities," and  that  he  is  apt  to  regard  our  Christian  beliefs  as  a 
"  stealing  into  Heaven  by  sticking  ostrich-like  our  head  into  fal- 
lacies on  earth."  t     But  beyond  this  we  know  nothing  positively. 
We  are  not  going,  then,  to  write  liim  down  pantheist.    But  he  has 
given  us  occasion  to  say  that  the  tendency  of  much  of  what  he 
has  Maitten  is  pantheistical.     He  does  not,  indeed,  say  anything 
so  offensive  on  the  subject  of  Christianity,  as  his  admirer,  Mr. 
Emerson.     He  never  speaks  of  it  as    "  an  Eastern  monarchy, 
built  by  indolence  and  fear,"  nor  charges  it  with  the  radical  defect 
of  dwelling  vath  noxious  exaggeration  about  the  person  of  Jesus.]; 

preparation  for  a  new  moral  era,  aud  uuder  what  conditions  this  necessary  func- 
tion was  discharged,"  and  thereby  constructing  an  arpument  in  favour  of  Chris- 
tianity, remarl<s,  "the  ground  of  that  Christian  fortitude  (the  fortitude _  of 
Polycarp  and  his'contemporaries)  v,hich,in  the  end,  prevailed  overtlie  polytheism 
of  the  Roman  State,  was  a  bei.ikf  toward  a  Person  ;  it  was  not  an  opinion  as  to 
a  doctrine  "—"  hut  a  belief  toward  a  Person  whose  authority  they  regarded  as 
paramount  to  every  other."  (Pp.  77,  74.)  This  behef  in  a  personal  Saviour-God 
is  the  grand  lever  in  the  world's  elevation. 

*  Life  of  Foster.  +  Life  of  Sterling. 

t  Emerson's  Address  to  a  Senior  Class  of  Divinity. 


83  PANTHEISM  ;    OK, 

But  we  ave  at  a  loss  to  gather  any  better  religion  from  his  pages 
than  a  kind  of  irran-worship.  He  sees  Godlike  principles  "^in 
Inrman  nature,  especially  in  great  and  earnest  men,  who  have 
made  any  impression  irpon  the  world,  and  he  falls  down  himself, 
and  calls  upon  others  to  fall  down  and  do  thenr  homage.  Moses 
and  Zoroaster,  Jesus  Christ  and  ^lahomet,  Saul  of  Tarsus  and 
Paul  the  Apostle,  were,  though  not  in  the  same  degree,  alike 
divinely  inspired  men.  His  hero-worship  points  to  the  Emersoir 
doctrine  of  the  soul.  He  says  virtually,  what  the  American  says 
openly,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  nature  sutlers  perversion 
in  bein^/  attributed  to  one  or  two  persoirs,  aird  denied  to  others. 
God  in  man,  not  exclusively  in  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  but  God  iir 
every  man  in  whom  appear  greatness  and  earnestness,  seems  to  be 
the  religion  of  this  hero-worship.  Literatrrre,  in  short,  witli  him 
is  religion;  and  "the  true  sovereigrr  souls"  of  literatrrre,  the 
Goethes  and  so  on,  are  the  true  prophets  and  Gospel  preachers. 
The  contents  of  religion  are  accordingly  regarded  by  the  men  of 
this  school  as  fourrd  within  the  man,  not  coming  to  the  man  from 
withorrt,  the  soirl  is  a  revelatiorr  to  itself.  Emerson  has  said,  "it 
is  not  instruction,  but  provocation,  that  I  can  receive  from  airother 
sorrl.  Wliat  he  announces,  I  must  find  true  in  me,  or  wholly 
reject;  and  on  his  word,  or  as  his  secoird,  be  he  who  he  nray,  I 
can  accept  nothing."  And  says  Mr.  Carlyle  :  "the  Maker's  Laws, 
Avhether  they  are  promrrlgated  in  Sinai  thunder,  to  the  ear-  or  ima- 
gination, or  quite  otherwise  promulgated,  are  the  Laws  of  God; 
transcendent,  everlasting,  imperatively  demanding  obedience 
from  all  men.  This,  without  any  thunder,  or  with  never  so 
mrrch  thrrnder,  thou,  if  there  be  any  soul  left  in  thee,  canst  know 
of  a  truth.     The  Urriverse,  I  say,  is  made  by  Law;  the  gr-eat  Sord 

of  the  world  is  just   and  irot  unjust Rituals,  Liturgies, 

Credos,  Sinai  thunder :  I  kirow  nrore  or  less  the  history  of  these ; 
the  rise,  progress,  decline,  and  fall  of  these.  Can  thunder  from  all 
the  thirty-two  azimuths,  repeated  daily  for  centmies  of  years,  make 
God's  Laws  more  Godlike  to  me  ?  Brother,  no.  Perhaps  I  am 
grown  to  be  a  man  now;  and  do  not  need  the  thunder  and  the 
terror  any  longer !  Perhaps  I  am  above  being  frightened ;  per- 
haps it  is  not  fear,  but  revererrce  aloire,  that  shall  now  lead  me !  — 
lievelatiorrs,  Inspiratioirs?  Yes:  and  thy  own  god-created  soul, 
dost  thou  not  call  that  a  'revelation?'"  He  tells  us  that  religion 
is  "no  Morrison's  Pill  from  without,"  but  a  clearing  of  the  Inner 
Light  or  Moral  Conscience,  a  re-awakening  of  our  ownselves  from 
within;  the  world  has  looked  to  the  revelation  without,  but  it  was 
"  when  its  beard  was  irot  grown  as  now."=:=  And,  with  a  sneer  at 
the  old  churches  and  the  old  creeds,  he  says:  "What  the  light  of 
your  mind,  which  is  the  direct  inspiration  of  the  Almighty,  pro- 

*  Carlylo's  Past  and  Present,  pp.  307—312, 


Tllli    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PEKSONALITY.  '    oS) 

iioimoes  incredible, — that,  in  God's  name,  leave  nncreditcd ;  at 
your  peril  do  not  try  believing  that."*  Where  such  talk  as  this  is 
indulged  in,  the  law  and  the  testimony  is  very  little  valued.  Mr. 
Carlyle,  accordingly,  is  disposed  to  make  sincerity  or  earnestness 
the  test  of  truth  and  moral  greatness.  Christianity  is  thus  reduced 
from  its  high  position  as  the  only  true  religion,  to  a  level  with  the 
other  religions  of  the  earth,  and  what  a  man  honestly  believes, 
and  really  practises,  is  counted  a  good  orthodox  creed.  The  reve- 
lation is  made  within  the  man,  and  the  Outer  Light  is  respected 
only  in  so  far  as  it  agrees  with  the  Inner  Light.  All  this  comes 
from  a  dreamy,  exaggerated  notion  about  the  human  soul.  Mr. 
Carlyle  does  not  bay,  with  Proudhon  and  Emerson,  that  the 
highest  being  is  man,  and  thus  make  theology  anthropology,  but 
much  of  what  he  does  say  looks  in  that  direction.  And  his  style 
of  expression  is  frequently  such  as  to  lead  many  of  his  indiscrimi- 
natiug  admirers  to  that  position,  or  to  strengthen  those  in  it  who 
already  occupy  it.  He  does  not  stop  with  scowling  upon  the 
formalism  of  the  age,  and  calling  upon  men  to  be  honest,  earnest, 
and  active,  but  the  scowl  seems  to  be  turned  towards  Clnistianity 
and  its  evidences  as  a  body  of  fact  lying  without.  He  is  not 
satisfied  with  a  natural  reverence  for  what  is  great  and  good  in 
any  of  our  race,  but  the  great  with  him  becomes  Divine  or  God- 
like. In  a  mighty  intellect  we  recognise  the  presence  and  power 
of  the  Divinity.  And  for  such  he  claims  something  like  worship 
or  religious  admiration.  His  hero-worship  is  just  a  kind  of  intel- 
lectual pantheism.  It  is  preaching  up,  though  in  a  somewhat 
different  way  from  the  men  of  Ae  Emerson  school,  the  doctrine  of 
the  divinity  of  the  soul.  Mucli  as  Mr.  Carlyle  is  to  be  admired 
for  his  original  vigorous  thinking,  his  liberal  and  independent 
cast  of  mind,  and  his  wish  to  raise  up  among  us  an  earnest  race  of 
men,  we  cannot  but  deprecate  the  religious  tendency  of  a  great 
deal  that  he  has  written,  as  pantheistical. 

"The  result,"  says  Professor  Garbett.f  "is  briefly  this.  The 
human  mind  has  wakened  into  a  mighty  thrilling  consciousness  of 
its  collective  capacity ;  it  has  gathered  up  into  one  great  unity  and 
organized  humanity,  all  individual  intellects  and  hearts,  all  genius 
and  all  inspiration";  and  exulting  in  tliis  great  corporate  lile,  and 
bounding  pulse,  thus  identified  with  it,  it  is  drank  with  pride  and 
worships  itself.  In  its  own  depths  it  believes  all  life  and  knowledge 
to  lie;  the  meaning  of  all  outward  utterances  and  phenomena, 
and  the  self-evolved  solution  of  all  mysteries  in  heaven  and  earth. 
Before  the  chancery  of  its  own  subjective  laws  and  arbitrary 
requirements,  all  objective  truth  is  called  to  judgment.  It  is  itself 
God  in  fact,  and  the  universe  is  its  product  and  its  mirror."     We 

*  Life  of  Sterling,  p.  78.  ,     ,  ,    ,       .,      r-   • 

+  See  an  admirable  sermon  on  tlae  Pcvsonality  of  God,  preached  oefore  the  L  lu- 
versity  of  Oxford. 


40 


pantheism;  oh, 


are  remiuded  of  Tennyson's  truthful  and  beautiful  description  of 
mere  intellectual  knowledge  ; 

"  What  is  she,  cut  from  love  and  faith 
But  some  wild  Pallas  from  the  hrain 

"  Of  Demons  ?  fiery  hot  to  burst 
All  barriers  in  her  onward  race 
For  power.    Let  her  know  her  place  : 
She  is  the  second,  not  the  first. 

"  A  higher  hand  must  make  her  mild, 
If  all  be  not  in  vain  ;  and  guide 
Her  footsteps,  moving  side  by  side 
With  wisdom,  like  the  younger  child  : 

"  For  she  is  earthly  of  the  mind. 

But  Wisdom  heavenly  of  the  soul.'  * 

We  conclude  by  taking  a  bird's-eye  view  of  some  of  the  bearings 
of  this  form  of  infidelity,  and  VN^ith  some  remarks  in  disin-oof  of  it. 
The  doctrine  of  an  impersonal  God,  as  we  have  seen,  lies  at  its 
l)asis.  The  universe  is  the  di%dnity,  and  men  themselves,  as 
"  God-intoxicated,"  mingle  vrith  it.  Out  of  this  fundamental  idea 
rise  the  follownig : 

1.  Creation,  with  the  pantheist,  is  not  a  free  act,  hut  an  inevi- 
table necessity.  It  is  not  a  complete  effect,  but  a  process  that  is 
going  on  eternally.  Hegel  says,  God  did  not  create  the  world,  he 
is  eternally  creating  it.  Creation  is  God  passing  into  activity,  but 
neither  suspended  nor  exhausted  in  the  act.  Anaximander  said 
substantially  the  same  thing  ages  before  him.  And  Victor  Cousin 
has  repeated  it  after  him.  "The  distinguishing  characteristic  of 
the  Deity,"  says  the  French  philosopher,  "  being  an  absolute 
creative  force,  which  cannot  but  pass  into  activity,  it  follows,  not 
that  the  creation  is  possible,  but  that  it  is  necessary."  And  the 
men  of  the  Emerson  school  tell  us,  that  the  world  is  "  a  projection 
of  God  in  the  unconscious."  Pantheism  is  thus  fatalistic.  We, 
according  to  enlightened  reason  and  Scriptural  truth,  have  been 
wont  to  believe  that  God  existed  independently,  from  eternity,  in 
a  state  of  absolute  perfection,  and  that,  of  his  own  good  pleasure, 
he  called  the  universe  into  being.  Moses  began  his  historical 
narrative  by  declaring,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens 
and  the  earth;"  and  he  sung,  "Before  the  mountains  were 
brought  forth,  or  ever  thou  hadst  formed  the  earth  and  the  world, 
even  from  everlasting  to  everlasting,  thou  art  God."  The  pious  in 
all  ages,  on  looking  over  the  creation,  have  said,  "  Our  God  made 
the  heavens."  And  the  heavenly  inhabitants  cry,  "  Thou  hast 
created  all  things,  and  for  thy  pleasure  they  are  and  were  created." 
But,  according  to  the  pantheist,  this  is  all  a  delusion.  The  Divine 
free-will  is  a  nonentity.  Creation  is  but  the  inevitable  develop- 
ment of  the  one  Being  that  is  beneath  all  and  in  all.  Thus  are 
falsified  all  those  clear  marks  of  design  in  the  universe  on  which 

*  lu  Memonam,  p.  177, 


THE    DENIAL    01    THE    DIVIXE    PERSONALITV.  41 

mcM  liave  looked  for  ages,  the  world  is  robbed  of  all  its  moral 
grandeur,  the  holy  emotions  of  man's  religions  nature  are  re- 
pressed, and  he  has  nothing  to  behold  but  a  creation  that  has 
sprung  from  fate  and  necessity,  and  nothing  to  think  of  behind 
the  whole,  but  an  absolute  creative  force  ever  passing,  not  from  a 
moral  but  a  physical  necessity,  into  activity.  We  may  theoreti- 
cally distinguish  pantheism  from  atlieism,  but  assuredly  the  man 
who  looks  upon  the  universe,  and  says  that  it  is  "  a  remoter  and 
inferior  incarnation  of  God,"=:<  or  that'it  is  God  necessarily  passing 
.into  action,  is  as  much  without  God  in  the  world,  as  the  man  who 
ascribes  every  thing  to  mechanical  forces,  and  says  there  is  no 
God. 

2.  Pantheism  inevitahhj  destro7js  all  moral  distinctions,  and 
makes  man  irresponsible.  "  Evil  and  good  are  God's  right  hand 
and  left,"  is  the  doctrine  of  some  of  our  popular  literatare.f  And 
if  the  whole  phenomena  of  the  universe  be  one  chain  of  necessary 
development,  if  man  and  his  actions  are  strictly  inevitable  pulsa- 
tions of  the  one  great  source  of  being,  then  what  is  properly  called 
moral  evil  has  no  existence.  And  the  Emerson  school  tells  us 
that  it  lives  offly  in  dogmatic  theolog}^  "  Evil,  according  to  old 
philosophers,"  says  the  author  of  the  "  Representative  Men,"f  "is 
good  in  the  making.  That  pure  malignity  can  exist,  is  the  extreme 
proposition  of  unbelief     It  is  not  to  be  entertained  by  a  rational 

agent;  it  is  atheism;  it  is  the  last  profanation The  divine 

effort  is  never  relaxed;  the  carrion  in  the  sun  wiU  convert  itself 
to  gi-ass  and  flowers;  and  man,  though  in  brothels,  or  jails,  or  on 
gibbets,  is  on  his  way  to  all  that  is  good  and  tnie."  This  may 
accord  ^ith  the  generous  spirit  of  the  Indian  Yishnu,"  but  Chris- 
tianity and  it  are  wide  as  the  poles  asunder.  The  "Festus"  of 
I^Ir.  Bailey,  a  poem  of  gTeat  power  and  of  a  religious  spn-it,  is 
pervaded  by  this  bad  pantheistic  theology.  The  following  is  but 
a  specimen :  — 

"  The  soul  is  lint  an  org-an,  and  it  hatli 
No  power  of  good  and  evil  in  itself, 
ISIore  than  the  eye  hath  power  of  light  or  dark. 
God  fitted  it  for  good;  and  evil  is 
Good  in  another  way  we  are  not  skilled  in."  ? 

^  He-jce  the  notion  that  all  religions  are  good,  but  that  Chris 
tianity  is  the  best.  And  the  conclusion  :  "  all  souls  shall  be  in 
God,  and  shall  be  God,  and  nothing  but  God,  be."||  Dr.  Strauss 
moves  in  the  same  jDlane,  though  far  a-head,  when  he  says:  "  hu- 
man kind  is  impeccable,  for  the  progress  of  its  development  is 
irreproachable.  Foliation  cleaves  only  to  the  individual.  It  does 
not  reach  the  race  and  its  history.  The  human  race  is  the  Christ, 
the  God-made  man,  the  sinless  one,  that  dies,  rises  again,  and 

*  Emerson's  Nature,  p.  53.  +  Bailey's  Festus, Proem,  p.  vii. 

t  P.  68, "  Swedenhoi  g ;  or,  ihe  Mystic.        J  Festus,  p.  48.  II  Festus,  p.  109. 


42  pantheism;  or, 

inomils  into  t!io  beavei-S.' 
on  this  system,  a  delusion.  The  sense  of  responsibility,  which  is 
a  fact  in  the  natural  history  of  man,  is  belied.  And'^that  voice, 
•u'hicli  comes  from  the  recesses  of  our  moral  nature,  pointing  us 
from  a  jud.q-e  within  the  breast  to  a  judge  without  and  above,  is 
silenced.  That  God  is  ever  educing  good  from  evil  is  true,  and 
that  the  ministry  of  evil,  mysterious  though  't  be,  is  made  under 
his  benign  supremacy  to  subserve  most  important  purposes,  agrees 
at  once  with  experience  and  Scriptai-e.  But  that  evil  has  no 
positive  existence,  that  it  is  only  good  in  another  way,  is  as  repug- 
nant to  our  moral  sentiments  as  it  is  opposed  to  Christianity.  ^Ye 
will  persist  in  calling  this  course  of  conduct  bad,  and  that  opposite 
course  good;  and  can  never  act  on  the  belief  that  both  were  alike 
things  of  fate  and  necessity,  or  that  each  agent  is  a  structure  formed 
by  inevitable  laws,  and  part  or  particle  of  God.  When  this  creed 
})revails,  the  foundations  of  the  earth  will  be  out  of  course.  Only 
let  this  doctrine  leaven  the  mass  of  a  community,  and  the  result 
will  be  a  deluge  of  sensuality  and  crime. 

3.  This  system  sJiuts  out  Prayer.  Man  will  worship.  Here  the 
object  of  worship  is  self.  And  if  the  soul  knows  no  persons,  and 
is  itself  "wiser  than  the  whole  world," f  as  the  thorough-going 
pantheist  maintains,  it  were  folly  to  go  out  of  itself  for  the  re- 
sources either  in  the  way  of  a  rule  of  duty  or  of  spiritual  influences. 
Coleridge's  "Ancient  IMariner"  went  much  too  far  when  he 
said  •  — 

'  He  pi-ayetli  well  who  lovctU  well 

Both  mau,  and  bird,  and  beast. 
He  prayeth  best  who  loveth  best 

All  things  both  great  and  small : 
For  the  dear  God,  who  lovelh  us, 

He  made  and  loveth  all." 

But  Mr.  Emerson  and  his  school  go  much  farther  "  As 
soon  as  the  man  is  at  one  with  God,  he  will  not  beg  He 
will  then  see  prayer  in  all  action.  The  prayer  of  the  farmer, 
kneeling  in  his  field  to  weed  it ;  the  prayer  of  the  rower,  kneeling 
with  the  stroke  of  his  oar,  are  true  prayers,  heard  throughout  na- 
ture, though  for  cheap  ends."  Mr.  Theodore  Parker  who,  though 
not  a  professed  pantheist,  pretends  to  have  found  pantheism  in  the 
writings  of  John  the  Evangelist,  discourses  in  a  similar  way. 
Speaking  of  what  he  calls  the  happy  condition  of  the  religious 
man,  he  tells  us  that  his  "  religion  demands  no  particular  actions, 
forms,  or  modes  of  thought:  the  man's  ploughing  is  holy  as  his 
])rayer — his  daily  bread  as  the  smoke  of  his  sacrifice;  his  home 
sacred  as  liis  temple  ;  his  work  day  and  In's  sabbath  are  alike  God's 
day.  His  jiriest  is  tlie  holy  spirit  within  him."]:  And  if  Mr. 
Carlylo  does  not  mean  to  countenance  this  pantheistic  dogma,  why, 
in  "  The  Modern  Worker,"  does  he  so  frequently  talk  tlius :  "  ^^'ork 
♦  Lebeu  Jesu  (last  chapter).  +  Emerson.  X  Parker's  Discourses,  p.  110. 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  43 

is  ofa  religions  nature.  .  .  .  All  true  work  is  sacred;  in  all  true  work, 
were  it  bat  true  hand-labour,  there  is  something  of  divineness. 
Labour,  wide  as  the  earth,  has  its  summit  in  heaven.  Sweat  of 
the  brow,  and  up  from  that  to  sweat  of  the  brain,  sweat  of  the 
heart;  which  includes  all  Kepler  calculations,  Newton  medita- 
tions, all  sciences,  all  spoken  epics,  all  acted  heroisms,  martyrdoms, 
—  up  to  that '  Agony  of  bloody  sweat,'  which  all  men  have  called 
divine  !  O  brother,  if  this  is  not  '  worship,'  then  I  say,  the  more 
pity  for  worship  ;  for  this  is  the  noblest  thing  yet  discovered  under 
God's  sky."--  No  doubt  all  this  will  be  hailed  by  many  of  the 
listeners  and  readers  of  Emerson,  Pai'ker,  and  Carlyle.  And  there 
may  be  here  and  there,  "  the  poor  day-labourer,  the  weaver  of  your 
coat,  tlie  sewer  of  yom*  shoes,"  who,  having  no  inclination  for 
prayer,  may  like  to  be  told  that  "no  man  has  worked,  or  can 
work,  except  religiously,"  and  that  he  shall,  "  return  home  in 
honour,  to  his  far  distant  home  in  honour."f  But  it  will  not  do  for 
the  millions  who  fail  to  attain  to  such  a  delirium  of  soul  as  these 
poetic-philosophers,  and  whom  they  will  never  get  to  believe  that 
the  fountain  of  all  good  is  in  themselves,  that  they  are  divine  pil- 
grims in  nature,  and  that  everything  attends  their  steps.  No. 
Men's  minds,  which  have  not  been  spoiled  by  a  philosophy  falsely 
so  called,  will  ever,  as  aforetime,  go  out  in  a  felt  sense  of  want 
They  will  cry,  in  spite  of  all  tliis  delirious  teaching,  "  who  will  shew 
us  any  good?"  And  experience  will  continue  to  attest  that  man 
will  never  possess  the  satisfying  good,  until  as  a  beggar  he  say, 
"  Lord,  lift  thou  up  the  light  of  thy  countenance  upon  us." 

4.  What  becomes  o^  in  dividual  immortality  in  such  a  system  as 
pantheism?  It  is  absorbed  and  lost.  Men  in  all  ages,  even  in. 
the  absence  of  revelation,  have  yearned  for  existence  beyond  death 
and  the  grave.  The  gospel,  by  bringing  life  and  immortality  to 
light,  has  answered  these  yearnings.  So  that  with  all  oar  moral 
and  religious  impressions,  is  blended  the  conviction  of  our  indi- 
vidual existence  being  prolonged  on  the  other  side  of  the  tomb. 
We  are  conscious  of  our  personal  being  now,  our  moral  nature 
points  to  the  continuance  of  our  conscious  peisonality  hereafter; 
and  an  authoritative  revelation  has  not  only  set  its  seal  to  the 
truth  of  the  personal  immortality  of  man,  but  shed  an  illumination 
all  its  own  on  the  grave  and  the  world  beyond.  But  life  with  the 
pantheist  is  a  di'eam,  and  death  is  absorption.  It  is  like  the  re- 
turn of  a  ray  of  light  to  the  sun  whence  it  emanated,  or  a  drop  of 
water  to  the  gi-eat  ocean  from  which  it  originally  came  The 
disciples  of  a  system  do  not  always  go  to  the  full  length  of  the 
system  itself.  And  so  it  may  happen  that  some  professed  pan- 
theists have  not  discarded  the  belief  of  personal  immortality.  But 
such  is  the  legitimate  issue  of  the  system,  and  such  will  actually 
bo  its  result  when  descending  from  the  schools,  it  becomes  tho 
*  Past  and  Present,  rp.  208,  27L  +  Iljid.  pp.  278,  872. 


41  pantheism;  oe, 

faitli  of  the  common  people.  Witli  the  pantlieists  of  the  East,  the 
consciousness  of  separate  existence  is  an  illusion,  which  in  a  little 
time  will  pass  away.  The  souls  of  men  being  portions  of  the 
divine  essence,  "parts  or 'particles  of  God,"  will  ultimately  return 
to  their  source,  so  that,  apart  from  the  great  substance,  there  will 
he  no  conscious  existence.  Whatever  might  be  Hegel's  individual 
view  of  the  future  state  of  man,  Hegelianism,  in  this  respect,  is 
thorouglily  pantheistic.  "  On  the  doctrine  of  immortality,"  re- 
marks ":Mr.  Morell,^;^  "  Hegel  has  said  but  httle,  and  that  little  by 
no  means  satisfactory."  But  it  is  apart  of  his  philosophy,  that  the 
Divine  Being  is  necessitated  to  send  forth  existences  and  to  absorb 
them  again.  Eeinhard,  who  is  deemed  a  fair  and  competent  judge 
of  the  system,  says,  that  "  according  to  Hegel's  speculative  de- 
cisions, the  individual  personality  of  man  is  perishable  in  its  very 
nature.  In  his  view, reason  demands  that  the  thinking  individual 
sliould  acknowledge  the  nothingness  of  his  individual  essence,  and 
willingly  meet  self-annihilation  in  view  of  his  entering  into  that 
universal  substance  which,  like  Chronos  in  the  old  mythology, 
devours  all  its  own  offspring." f  Strauss  and  others  of  the  same 
school,  have  gone  this  length.  His  words  are,  "  a  life  beyond  the 
grave  is  the  last  enemy  which  speculative  criticism  has  to  oppose, 
and,  if  possible,  to  conquer."^  Here,  as  in  some  other  points,  the 
extremes  of  sensationalism  and  idealism  meet.  The  atheist  and 
the  pantheist  shake  liands  as  believers  in  the  same  black  creed. 
Danton,  on  his  trial,  said,  "  My  name  is  Danton,  my  residence  will 
soon  be  in  annihilation ,  my  name  will  live  in  the  pantheon  of  history." 
And  the  pantheist  says,  let  us  dream  on  the  dayof  our  existence  here, 
for  the  night  is  coming  when  self  must  return  to  the  great  ocean 
of  being  and  there  be  lost  for  ever.  Such  are  the  issues  of  a  sys- 
tem that  denies  the  livinfj  Personal  God. 


1.  In  proof  of  the  personality  of  God,  we  might,  in  the  first 
l)lace,  argue  from  our  oicti  ])ersonality.  That  we  are  real,  intelligent, 
and  responsible  persons,  is  a  matter  of  consciousness.  There  is 
a  spirit  in  man.  He  has  understanding,  will,  moral  sentiment,  a 
power  to  choose  between  good  and  evil,  and  he  knows  it.  It  is 
this  which  gives  us  a  decided  pre-eminence  over  the  whole  visible 
creation.  It  separates  at  an  immeasurable  distance  from  us  the 
flowers  of  the  earth  however  beautiful,  the  stars  of  heaven  however 
bright,  and  the  beasts  and  birds  however  wise.  Were  it  possible 
for  us  to  be  divested  of  our  complete  personality  as  moral,  in- 
telligent, individual  beings,  the  crown  would  fall  from  our  head-, 
and  we  would  descend  in  the  scale  of  earthly  creatures.  Person- 
ality— living,  moral,  and  intellectual  pt^rsonality  —  such  as  man's, 

*  Histoi-y  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  p.  190. 
+  Dr.  Beard's  Voices  of  the  Church,  p.  \-2.  %  Glaubenslobre. 


THE    DENIAL    OF   THE    DIVINE    PERSONALITY.  45 

is  clearly,  tbeu,  a  perfection.  And  in  the  very  existence  of  such 
personal  beings  we  have  an  argument  for  a  Personal  Gocl.  Let  it 
be  supposed  that  by  intuition,  or  argumentation,  or  both,  we  had 
come  simply  to  the  knowledge  of  a  First  Cause ;  it  is  evident  that 
the  conception  of  the  j^ossession  of  perfect  personality  by  Him 
would  render  Him  a  more  glorious  13eiug  than  the  want  of  it. 
And  this  being  the  case,  He  must  possess  it,  for  our  conceptions  of 
the  greatest  Being  in  the  universe,  can  never  surpass,  but  must 
always  come  short  of  the  reality.  "It  is  clear,"  says  Professor 
Garbett,  "  that  anything  which  does  not  possess  personality,  or 
possesses  it  in  a  low  degree,  whether  it  be  like  the  earth,  however 
exquisitely  modelled  into  beauty  and  sublimity  manifold,  or  the 
beasts  of  the  field,  however  marvellous  their  living  powers,  must 
be  inferior  to  ourselves.  And,  therefore,  Almighty  God  must  be  a 
person  likewise.  Por  if  not,  He  would  be  inferior  to  ourselves, 
contrary  to  the  supposition  on  which  we  go.  And  the  very  name 
imports  that,  ori  ttot  kari,  He  is,  at  all  events,  the  highest  of 
beings.  You  may,  indeed,  if  you  please,  abandon  the  intellect  to 
the  lawless  tyranny  of  imagination  !  .  .  .  Drimk  with  the  mad- 
dening wine  of  intellectual  licentiousness  and  creative  speculation, 
you  may  rave  eloquently  of  a  Being  of  infinite  power,  who  pours 
forth  out  of  His  exhaustless  bosom,  unfathomable  as  the  abyss  of 
space  itself,  all  glory,  all  living  things,  multitudinous  and  diver- 
sified beyond  created  arithmetic,  such  as  fill  the  universe.  And 
yet,  by  the  same  right  of  unreason  and  self-will,  you  may  lay  it 
down  that  He  has  not  a  self-consciousness,  nor  a  choice,  nor  any- 
thing, in  short,  of  that  which  makes  us,  to  our  fellow-men,  objects 
of  love  and  hope,  of  di-ead  and  hatred,  of  joy  and  of  misery.  _  And 
you  may  then,  piling  postulate  on  postulate  into  the  empty  air,  till 
you  reach,  in  haze  and  mist,  the  limbo  of  utter  unreality,  set  up 
this  blind,  and  dumb,  and  deaf  abomination,  with  a  crown  upon 
its  head,  on  the  tin-one  of  Him  who  is,  and  was,  and  is  to  be  —  the 
living  Jehovah.  .  .  .  But  this  is  not  a  God,  according  to  the  sup- 
position ;  and,  of  coiu'se,  is  not  a  living,  loving,  avenging,  awful 
Deity.  Why  in  such  a  case,  though  the  spirit  within  us  is  clothed 
in  perishable  dust  and  ashes,  we  should  be  far  superior,  in  the 
order  of  intelligent  being,  to  such  a  Deity,  with  all  Plis  im 
mensity."t- 

2.  Men,  in  general,  feel,  in  the  most  solemn  and  affecting  mo 
ments  of  their  lives,  that  God  is  a  real  Person.  I^emonstration  is 
not  necessary.  Consciousness  and  inward  experience,  more  power- 
fully than  any  argumentation,  attest  it.  This  truthful  evidence 
is  given  forth  at  times  from  the  bosoms  of  the  worst  and  the  best 
of  "men.  How  true  to  natme  are  such  pai-ables  as  those  of  the 
Prodigal  Son,  and  the  Pharisee  and  the  Publican.  And  the  most 
life-like  feature  in  each  pictui'e,  is,  when  the  Prodigal  coming  ts 

*  The  Personality  of  God,  pp.  2G— 29. 


4.0  pantheism;  ot!, 

Jiimself  exclaimed,  "Father,!  have  sinned;"  and  the  Puhliean 
conscions  of  his  burden  of  guilt,  cried,  "  God  be  merciful  to  me  a 
sinner."  The  very  cry  for  help  whicli,  under  an  irresistible  im- 
pulse, ascends  from  the  human  soul  when  in  imminent  danger  or 
stricken  under  a  sense  of  sin,  is  a  testimony  of  conscience  to  the 
personality  of  God.  It  is  the  witness  of  unsophisticated  nature 
to  the  truth  that  He  is  a  Being  who  can  save  from  danger,  who 
has  displeasure  to  be  dreaded,  and  mercy  to  be  sought  after.  The 
mind,  then,  unrestrained  by  philosopliical  theories  or  other  ar- 
tificial hindraiii;es,  recognises  Him  in  the  personality  of  the  judge, 
the  sovereign,  or  the  saviour.  The  consciousness  of  the  most  ex- 
cellent ones  of  the  earth,  gives  a  yet  clearer  evidence  for  the 
Divine  personal  existence  and  attributes.  Men  who  have  been 
renewed  in  the  spirit  of  their  mind,  and  who  long  for  closer  union 
Avith  the  best  and  greatest  Being  in  the  universe,  never  think  of 
Him  as  a  substance  "  stretched  uncouthly  through  infinite  space," 
which  has  only  arrived  at  self-consciousness  in  their  own  souls. 
But  they  thirst  for  God,  for  the  living  God,  They,  clothed  with 
humility,  bend  the  knee,  and,  with  hearts  uplifted  to  heaven,  say, 
hi  filial  confidence,  "Abba  Father."  They  gather  up,  as  it  were, 
nto  one,  all  the  glorious  attiibutes  by  which  He  is  distinguished, 
and  contemplate  Him  as  Creator  and  Lord,  Father  and  Friend, 
Judge  and  Saviour.  This  we  regard  as  real  evidence,  uttered 
from  amid  the  indestructible  elements  of  man's  moral  nature,  for 
the  perfect  personality  of  God. 

3.  The  Sacred  Scriptures  througJiout  are  fall  of  the  Divine  Per- 
sonality.  Every  page  breathes  or  burns  with  it.  From  the  opening 
sentence  of  Genesis  to  the  closing  chapter  of  Revelation,  in  its 
unadorned  histories  as  well  as  in  its  magnificent  poetry,  in  the 
•  anguage  alike  of  its  threatenings  and  its  promises,  the  Bible  moves 
,vith  the  living  Personal  God.  This  places  an  impassable  gulf 
between  the  religion  of  the  pantheist  and  that  of  the  Christian. 
And  the  Bible  owes  much  of  its  telling  power  over  men's  hearts, 
as  a  divine  instrument,  to  this  pervading  element  of  personality. 
Be  it  remembered  that  this  is  the  book  which  has  done  vastly  more 
than  all  others  to  regenerate  and  elevate  our  race,  and  that,  under 
the  agency  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  it  exerts  this  influence  by  bringing 
the  mind  into  contact  with  God,  not  as  a  vague  immensity,  but  as 
n,  glorious,  awful,  benignant  person  with  whom  we  have  to  do. 
The  sinner  has  been  arrested  in  his  wickedness,  his  spirit  has 
quailed  within  him,  and  he  has  become  a  new  creature,  by  hearing 
the  living  God  of  tloly  Scripture  speak  to  him  in  solemn  warning 
and  melting  invitation.  The  saint  has  been  refreshed  and  armed 
fiuew  by  the  thought  that  the  same  Divine  Being  who  clothes  the 
grass  of  the  field,  and  cares  for  the  fowls  of  the  air,  loves,  as  a 
father,  liis  own  redeemed  children,  and  surrounds  them  with  his 
favour  as  with  a  shield.     Y«?i? :  the  Spiiit,  by  v.hose  inspiration 


THF    DENIAL   OF   THE    DIVINE    PEESONALITY.  47 

the  Word  was  given,  bearetli  witness  with  our  spirit  to  the  perfect 
personality  of  God.  And  could  this  be  separated  from  the  Bible, 
and  a  pantheistic  creed  substituted  in  its  stead,  it  would  be  as  it' 
the  sun  had  been  shorn  of  his  beams,  and  the  ocean  had  lost  his 
voice.  "  Ye  shall  know,"  said  Joshua  to  the  Israelites,  "  that  the 
living  God  is  among  you  "  "  It  is  a  fearful  thing,"  says,  Paul,  "  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  living  God."  And  in  such  winning 
words  as  these,  of  which  the  sacred  volume  is  full,  how  near  does 
the  personality  of  Him  whose  name  and  nature  are  love,  come  to 
the  heart;  "  Incline  your  ear,  and  come  unto  me;  hear,  and  your 
soul  shall  live."  "  Look  unto  me,  and  be  ye  saved,  all  the  ends  of 
the  earth :  for  I  am  God,  and  there  is  none  else."  The  relational 
conception  of  the  Most  High,  as  our  Maker,  King,  Father,  Saviour, 
Judge,  guards  us  as  efiectually  against  a  pantheistic  view  on  the 
one  hand ;  as  the  absolute  conception  of  Him  does  against  an 
anthropomorpliic  view  on  the  other.  Both  conceptions  blend 
with  each  other  in  the  Bible.  No  book  gives  us  such  exalted 
ideas  of  the  Infinite  Intelligence,  and  none  is  less  in  harmony 
with  the  system  of  pantheism.  "It  is  all  in  the  same  spirit: 
burning,  powerful  words;  real  above  everything  in  this  world; 
piercing,  as  living  words  must  needs  do,  to  the  dividing  of  the  very 
hearts  and  reins.  They  have  the  impression,  they  are  stamped 
with  the  seal  of  the  living  God  The  tetragrammaton  is  on 
them."* 

4.  In  Christ  Jesus  ive  see  the  ahsolute  and  tlie  j)ersonal  reconciled. 
Pantheism  and  anthropomorpliism,  though  traceable  to  the  same 
soiu'ce,  are  two  extremes,  towards  one  of  which  the  mind,  in  the 
absence  of  revelation  or  in  the  want  of  faith  in  it,  has  ever  sliowii 
a  strong  tendency.  Men  have  been  apt  either  to  limit  the  Infinite, 
and  think  of  Him  as  being  such  an  one  as  themselves,  or  to  con- 
ceive of  Him  as  an  infinite  substance  of  which  all  things  are  but 
the  modes  and  manifestations.  How  to  reconcile  the  personality 
with  the  infinitude  of  the  ])i\dne  natui'e,  seems  to  be  one  of  those 
sublime  mysteries  pertaining  to  the  Divine  existence  which  un- 
aided reason  cannot  solve.  Such  knowledge  is  too  wonderful  for 
us ;  it  is  high,  we  cannot  attain  unto  it.  As  principles  of  abstract 
theology  they  may  be  clearly  made  out,  but  really  to  grasp  them 
in  our  religious  belief  as  attributes  of  the  Almighty,  is  a  groat 
achievement  of  faith.  The  two  are,  however,  reconciled  before 
our  view  in  Him  who  is  the  Word  made  flesh,  at  once  the  Son  of 
God  and  the  Son  of  man  The  creation  of  the  world  was  the 
work  of  an  infinite  Being.  The  everlasting  God,  the  Lord,  is  the 
Creator  of  the  ends  of  the  earth.  And  by  Jesus  Christ  were  all 
things  created,  that  are  in  heaven  and  that  arc  in  earth.  Tlie 
redemption  of  the  world  demanded  the  interposition  of  Him  who 
inade  it.  It  was  Jehovali's  prerogative  to  say,  "■  Behold  I  creu'-e 
*  y^rofessor  Garbetfs  Plscovus**.  p.  4% 


48  i-atukalism;  or,  the  de^jiai. 

new  bea^^ens  and  a  new  earth."  And  in  Emmanuel,  God  in  our 
nature,  God  with  us,  we  see  the  Eedeemer  of  man.  The  judgment 
of  the  world  is  an  act  of  the  Absolute.  None  else  is  judge  but 
God.  And  the  Son  of  man,  coming  in  his  glory,  occupies  the 
judgment  throne.  The  Divine  Being,  without  any  limitation  of 
his  absolute  perfections,  is  thus  revealed  in  the  person  of  Christ. 
Great  indeed  is  the  mystery  of  godliness.  The  incarnation  is  a 
stupendous  fact  that  surpasses  reason,  for  whatever  pertains  to  the 
Divine  nature  must  be  incomprehensible  by  the  human  mind. 
But  it  contains  in  itself  the  solution  of  the  mysterious  problem 
how  the  absolute  and  the  personal  agree  in  One.  And  with  all  its 
mysteriousness,  it  becomes  a  resting  truth  to  the  minds  of  men 
and  angels,  when  attempting  to  grasp  the  idea  of  an  infinite  and 
yet  a  personal  God.  The  Lion  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  the  Boot  of 
bavid,  has  opened  the  book  and  loosed  the  seals  thereof.  And 
happy  the  mind  that  returns  from  its  wanderings,  that  leaves  off 
raving  about  a  vague  immensity  wliich  it  can  neither  love  nor 
fear,  and  rests  in  Jehovah- Jesus,  God  manifest  in  the  flesh. 


CHAPTEB,  III. 

TUE    DENIAL   OF    THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT,   OR   NATURALISM. 

Distinctive  characteristic  of  Naturalism— Denounces  every  idea  of  Divine  inter- 
position—  Not  peculiar  to  any  age  or  counti-y— Broadly  manifested  in  some 
-works  on  Physical  and  Moral  Science  System  of  Auguste  Comte — "Vestiges 
of  the  Natural  History  of  Creation" — Humboldt's  "  Cosmos"  —  Combe's  consti- 
tution of  Man" — The  Owen  School — Naturalism  in  the  department  of  Bible 
Theology;  Anti-miracle  School  of  Gennany — Spinoza — Paulus — Strauss  — 
ISIiraoles  considered  — Hume  and  Strauss  alike  guilty  of  a  petUio  principii  — 
Denial  of  Special  Inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  — Theodore  Parker  — Inspiration 
viewed  as  a  fact— Mr.  MoreU's  Position  — General  remarks  upon  Naturalism 
as  a  whole  — The  idea  of  a  self-sustaining  universe  based  upon  false  analogy 
—  Chargeable  with  anthropomorphism  —  Opposed  to  palpable  evidence  of 
Geology — Assigns  no  adequate  cause  for  Christianity  and  its  effects — Dia- 
metrically opposed  to  the  religion  of  the  Bible — Naturalism  unnatural. 

Naturalism,  or,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  rationahsm,  is  dis- 
tinguishable enough  from  atheism  and  pantheism.  The  rationalist 
is  distinguished  from  the  atheist  by  his  theoretical  belief  of  a 
Supreme  Power,  and  he  is  distinguished  from  the  pantheist  by 
his  denial  of  an  ever-present  and  all-pervading  Divine  energy. 
Tiie  pantheist  says,  God  is  at  hand;  the  rationalist  ^ays,  God  is 
afar  off.  Pantheism  sees  the  Divine  Being  in  all  things,  and 
confounds  the  Creator  with  the  creation.  Whereas  naturalism, 
•though  distingLiishing  Him  from  His  works,  banishes  Him  into  a 
distant  solitude.  It  is  not  essential  to  this  system  that  the  evi- 
dences of  design  in  proof  of  a  creative  intelligence  be  denied,  hovv-- 
ever  much  it  may  tend  in  that  dh'ection,  and  though  many  of  its 
abettors  may  have  gone  that  length.  But  its  distinctive  cha- 
racteristic, as  a  form  of  infidelity,  is,  tliat  wliile  admitting  the 


OF    THE    DIVINE    P1^0vIDE^;TIAL    GOVERNMENT.  49 

■\yorld  to  have  been  originally  created  by  Gcd,  it  as  it  were  ex- 
trudes Him  ii'om  that  v;rorld,  by  reducing  it  to  a  self-sustained 
mechanism,  and  by  resolving,  what  are  generally  understood  by 
the  works  of  Providence,  into  a  regularly  successive  series  of  neces- 
sary developments.  The  seed,  having  the  vegetative  jiower  in 
itself,  is  cast  by  tlie  husbandman  into  the  soil,  and  tliere,  aided 
merely  by  natui-al  agencies,  it  is  left  to  develop  itself  into  the 
full-grown  plant  or  tree.  The  watch,  complete  in  its  wheels  and 
mainspring,  is  wound  up,  and  continues  to  move,  though  ever  so 
far  distant  from  the  maker.  The  ship-builder,  having  finished 
and  launched  the  ship,  leaves  it  entnely  to  the  care  of  the  sailors.-i^ 
Such  are  specimens  of  some  of  the  analogies  by  which  men  would 
exclude  God  from  his  own  world,  and  make  the  universe,  if  not 
independent  of  his  creative  power,  altogether  independent  of  his 
presence  and  control.  The  falsity  of  the  analogy  is  obvious,  and 
will  be  noticed  by  us  hereafter.  At  present  we  wish  to  get  as 
full-sized  a  view,  as  possible,,  of  the  system  itself. 

Men,  whose  piety  is  both  rational  and  scriptural,  have  been 
accustomed  to  consider  God  as  continually  present  in  the  world 
with  the  same  power  by  which  He  made  it.  They  reckon  up  no 
less  numerous  indications  of  a  designing  providential  agency  than 
of  an  original  creating  intelligence,  and  feel  that  they  would  be 
as  much  warranted  to  deny  the  presence  and  power  of  God  in 
creating,  as  to  deny  his  presence  and  power  in  sustaining  and 
conti'olling.  The  heavens  and  the  earth,  in  their  estimation, 
furnish  as  clear  and  impressive  tokens  of  the  agency  of  the 
Divine  Preserver  as  of  the  Divine  Creator.  The  seasons  roll  on 
in  beautiful  hai'mony,  but  God  is  there  present  as  the  source  of 
that  hai-mony.  We  may  speak  of  the  universe  as  a  huge  machine 
moved  by  natural  powers  or  mechanical  laws,  but  it  is  the  finger 
of  God  that  touches  the  subordinate  agencies  which  move  the 
whole.  He  acts  in  every  place,  upon  all  things,  and  throughout 
all  time.  And  but  for  his  pervading  influence,  the  world  would 
become  an  inactive  mass,  without  form  and  void,  and  darkness 
would  again  cover  the  face  of  the  deep.  The  language  of  Thom- 
son, according  to  the  creed  of  Cluistian  piety,  is  as  philosophically 
true  as  it  is  poetically  beautiful :  — 

"  But  wandering  oftwitli  brute  unconscious  gaze, 
Man  marks  not  Thee,  marks  not  the  mighty  hand, 
That,  ever-busy,  wheels  the  silent  spheres ; 
Works  in  the  secret  deep  ;  shoots,  steaming,  thence 
The  fair  profusion  that  o'erspreads  the  spring : 
Flings  from  the  sun  direct  the  flaming  day ; 
Feeds  evei-y  creature  ;  hurls  the  tempest  forth  ; 
And,  as  on  earth  this  grateful  change  revolves, 
With  transport  touches  all  the  springs  of  life." 

This  is  neither  pantheism  nor  naturalism.  It  distinguishes  the 
great  Intelligent  Spiiit  from  the  material  world  which  He  pervades, 

*  "  UtfaLer  discedit  auavi  exstructa  et  relinquit  eam  n&uiia."  —  Melancihon. 


50  naturalism;  or,  the  denial 

while  it  acknowledges  his  presence  and  energy  acting  upon  nil 
secon;,ary  causes  as  tlie  priinary  action  of  the  whole.  Hence  the 
ample  room  which  such  a  system  opens  for  the  outgoings  of  a 
grateful  and  lofty  devotion.  Hence  its  firm  faith  in  the  M'ell- 
attested  Divine  interpositions  of  the  past,  and  its  expectation  that, 
if  need  he,  similar  intei'[5ositions  will  take  place  in  the  future. 

Naturalism  denies  all  tliis.  It  denounces  it  as  the  progeny  of 
ignorance  and  fanaticism.  It  demolishes  it  at  once,  just  as  a  man 
on  awakening,  demolishes  the  aiiy  castles  which  he  huilt  during 
sleep.  If  naturalism  admits  of  a  special  and  supernatural  inter- 
ference at  all,  it  restricts  such  an  interference  to  the  original  act 
of  creation.  The  Almighty  is  allowed  to  come  forth,  create,  give 
life,  set  in  motion,  and  look  on  the  scene,  but  afterwards  He  retires, 
and  leaves  the  whole  to  nature  and  nature's  laws.  All  the  pheno- 
mena of  matter  and  mind  however  rich  and  magnificent,  all  the 
events  of  history  however  influential  and  unprecedented,  all  the 
changes  that  have  taken  place  in  nations  and  individuals  however 
thorough  and  beneficent,  have,  according  to  tliis  system,  occurred 
in  a  merely  natural  way,  just  as  the  engine  speeds  along  the  line 
of  rail  by  the  natural  force  of  steam.  The  poet  spake  with  a  poetic 
license  or  under  the  hallucination  of  genius,  when,  addresshig 
the  God  of  the  seasons,  he  said,  "  The  rolling  year  is  full  of 
Thee."  King  David,  in  a  dark  age,  sang  very  beautifully  but 
not  truly,  when  he  said  to  Jehovah,  "  Thou  visitest  the  earth, 
and  waterest  it :  Thou  greatly  enrichest  it  with  the  river  of 
God,  which  is  full  of  water:  Thou  preparest  them  corn  when 
Thou  hast  so  provided  for  it :  Thou  makest  it  soft  with  showers: 
Thou  blessest  the  springing  tliereof.  Thou  crownest  the  year 
with  Thy  goodness ;  and  Thy  paths  drop  fatness."  Jesus  Christ 
merely  accommodated  Himself  to  the  views  and  circumstances 
of  liis  followers,  when  He  said  to  them,  "  Behold  the  fowls 
of  the  air :  for  they  sow  not,  neither  do  they  reap,  nor  gather 
into  barns ;  yet  your  heavenly  Father  feedeth  them."  I\Iiracles 
are  impossible,  just  because  they  are  unnatural.  And  what  in 
theology  is  called  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence,  is  a  mystery, 
a  thing  supernatural,  and,  therefore,  not  to  be  believed.  The 
rationalist  traverses  the  wide  fields  of  space,  and  makes  himself 
familiar  with  the  laws  that  regulate  the  movements  of  suns  and 
stars;  or  he  penetrates  into  the  bowela  of  the  earth,  and  reads, 
amid  its  rocky  beds  and  their  wreck  of  animal  existence,  the 
history  of  a  past  world ;  but  neither  in  the  heavens  above  nor  in 
the  eartli  beneath,  does  he  recognise  the  presence  or  interposition 
of  God.  He  may  admit  that  the  Creator  has  left  the  impress  of 
his  finger  there  from  a  past  eternity,  but  he  sees  no  such  finger 
amid  the  continued  harmony  of  the  spheres  on  high,  or  amid  the 
convulsions  and  up-heavings  that  have  taken  i)lace  in  the  depths 
below.     Me  virtually,  if  not  openly,  says,  the  Almighty  was  once 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  51 

here  present,  Lut  He  has  withdrawn  ages  ago;  nature  reigns,  and 
all  physical  phenomena  are  the  necessary  result  of  mechanical 
laws.  The  rationalist  reads  history  too,  hut  he  sees  not  God  in 
history.  Its  marvellous  events,  however  unforeseen  hy  men,  how- 
ever much  they  startled  and  baffled  the  calculations  of  the  wise 
who  Avere  contemporaneous  with  them,  and  however  mighty  and 
protracted  have  been  their  influence  in  succeeding  times,  are 
drawn  by  him  into  that  iron  chain  of  necessary  development  in 
which  he  binds  up  all  things.  He  looks  too  upon  vast  masses  of 
men  sunk  in  ignorance  and  vice,  so  sunk  notwithstanding  the 
play  of  many  influences  upon  them  which  rationalists  deem 
beneficial,  and  he  will  admit  any  or  every  agency  into  the  work 
of  tlieir  regeneration  but  the  special  agency  of  the  Former  of 
men's  bodies  and  the  Father  of  men's  spirits.  "Is  it  not  strange," 
remarks  Jolm  Foster,*  "  to  observe,  how  carefully  some  philo- 
sophers, who  deplore  the  condition  of  the  world,  and  profess  to 
expect  its  melioration,  keep  their  si^eculations  clear  of  every  idea 
of  Divine  interposition?  No  builders  of  houses  or  cities  were 
ever  more  attentive  to  guard  against  the  access  of  flood  or  fire. 
li  He  should  but  touch  their  prosjDective  theories  of  improvement, 
they  would  renounce  them,  as  defiled  and  fit  only  for  vulgar 
fanaticism.  Their  system  of  Providence  would  be  profaned  by 
tlie  intrusion  of  the  Almighty.  Man  is  to  eftect  an  apotheosis 
for  himself,  by  the  hopeful  process  of  exhausting  his  corruption. 
Ajid  should  it  take  a  long  series  of  ages,  vices,  and  woes,  to  reach 
this  glorious  attainment,  patience  may  sustain  itself  the  while  by 
the  thought  that  wdien  it  is  realised,  it  will  be  burdened  with  no 
duty  of  religious  gratitude.  No  time  is  too  long  to  wait,  no  cost 
too  deep  to  incur,  for  the  triumph  of  proving  that  we  have  no 
need  of  a  Divinity,  regarded  as  possessing  that  one  attribute  which 
makes  it  delightful  to  acknowledge  such  a  Being,  the  benevolence 
that  would  make  us  happy.  But  even  if  this  noble  self-sufficiency 
cannot  be  realised,  the  independence  of  spirit  which  has  laboured 
for  it  must  not  sinli  at  last  into  piety.  This  afflicted  world,  '  this 
l^oor  teiTestrial  citadel  of  man,'  is  to  lock  its  gates,  and  keep  its 
miseries,  rather  than  admit  the  degradation  of  receiving  help 
from  God." 

This  form  of  infidelity  is  no  novelty.  It  is  not  peculiar  to  any 
age  or  country.  And  while  it  may  be  said  of  other  forms,  that 
they  slay  their  thousands,  it  must  be  said  of  tliis  that  it  slays  its 
ten  thousands.  This  was  the  doctrine  of  the  ancient  atomists  and 
Epicureans.  They  were  not,  theoretically  considered,  atheists. 
They  believed  in  the  existence  of  the  gods,  but  denied  that  they 
interfered  with  either  the  physical  or  moral  concerns  of  the  universe. 
Plato  held  the  doctrine  in  abhorrence,  and  made  it  one  of  the  three 
kinds  of  blasphemy  punishable  in  his  republic  with  death.     Justin 

*  Fosters  Essays,  p.  177,  l-'^'lh  edition. 


52  katuralism;  or,  the  denial 

Martyr,^  speaking  of  the  pliilosoi^hei's  in  his  time,  tells  as  they 
taught  it  to  he  "  useless  to  pray  to  God,  since  all  things  recur 
according  to  the  unchangeahle  laws  of  an  endless  progression." 
Some  of  the  English  deistical  writers  of  the  last  century,  held 
substantially  the  same  infidel  opinion.  Lord  Herbert,  "  the  first 
and  purest  of  our  English  free-thinkers,"  who  lived  in  the  century 
preceding,  includes  the  doctrine  of  Divine  providence  and  the 
duty  of  worshipping  God,  in  his  five  articles  of  religion.  But 
others  of  the  free-thinking  school  advanced  ahead  of  him,  and 
either  denied  that  the  Supreme  Being  interposed  in  the  affah-s  of 
men,  or  held  such  a  vague  idea  of  a  general  providence  as  virtually 
excluded  Him  from  the  government  of  the  woi'ld.  Chubb  seems  to 
have  maintained  that  God  kept  aloof  from  human  afiairs,  and  that 
whatever  happened  to  men  depended  entirely  upon  secondary 
causes.  Bolingbroke's  idea  of  a  providence  that  regarded  things 
collectively  but  not  individually,  was  such  as  left  no  room  for  the 
special  interposition  of  God  either  in  tlie  physical  or  moral  world. 
Hume,  in  his  essays  on  Miracles  and  Providence,  sapped  the  very 
foundations  of  natural  and  revealed  religion,  and  would  preclude 
us  from  believing  that  the  same  power  which  created  the  world, 
can  continue  to  sustain  it.  The  French  Encyclojjsedists,  who 
flourished  during  the  latter  half  of  the  same  century,  built  the 
whole  of  their  metaphysical  philosophy  upon  the  basis  of  mate- 
rialism, a  system  that  began  by  removing  God  to  a  distance  from 
the  world,  and  explaining  everything  by  secondary  causes,  and 
that  ended  in  excluding  Him  altogether  from  their  conceptions, 
and  elevating  nature  to  his  throne.  Men  of  science  and  literatm-e 
were  then  resolutely  bent  on  disregarding  everything  that  seemed 
to  admit  the  interference  or  idea  of  God,  and  on  shutting  them- 
selves up  in  a  system  of  blind  fatalism  and  stern  materialism. 
The  bold  scepticism  and  gross  impiety  of  such  schools  have,  in  a 
great  measure,  passed  away,  yet  much  of  the  spirit  that  animated 
them  is  manifested  in  our  own  times.  From  the  elaborate  work  on 
science  down  to  the  cheap  journal  that  circulates  aniong  the  masses 
of  the  people,  there  is  not  a  little,  both  in  our  own  country  and  on 
the  Continent,  that  is  avowedly  opposed  to  the  idea  of  Providence, 
crying  out  upon  it  as  a  bugbear  in  men's  path,  or  seeking  to  ex- 
l^lode  the  doctrine  by  maintaining  a  studied  silence  respecting  it, 
when  it  might  most  naturally  have  been  introduced. 

Such,  in  an  undisguised  form,  is  the  philosophical  system  of 
M  Auguste  Comte,  who  has  been  styled  the  Bacon  of  the  nine- 
teenth century. '1'=  He  has  given  to  the  world  a  large  work  of  pro- 
found science,)-  built  entirely  on  palpable  facts,  which  arc  said  to 
have  occurred  in  a  chain  of  necessary  development,  and  to  need 
nu  dogma  of  a  Divine  Providence  to  account  for  them.     It  iuter- 

*  Lewes'8  Biographical  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  iv.  p.  255. 
+  Cours  de  Philosopliie  Positive,  6  vol:;. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVETINMEN': 


53 


diets  every  investigation  beyond  plienomena  and  the  laws  of  phe- 
nomena, as  without  the  reach  of  the  human  mind.  And  not  only 
so,  but  every  philosophical  theory  admitting  the  intervention  of 
the  First  Cause,  is  denounced  as  bearing  a  drag  that  obstructs  the 
march  of  science  and  human  improvement.  This  is  very  broadly 
laid  down  in  the  law  of  mental  evolution  or  human  progress, 
which  he  applies  to  ev'ery  department  of  knowledge.  According 
to  him,  the  intelligence  of  mankind  passes  successively  through 
three  distinct  stages  :  the  supernatural,  the  metaphysical,  and  tlie 
positive.  The  first  is  the  lowest  or  infant  state  of  human  society. 
The  last  is  the  period  of  progressive  development,  in  which  tho 
mind  advan.ces  oiiward  to  perfection.  It  belongs  to  the  former,  to 
attribute  all  the  operations  of  nature  to  a  Divine  cause,  and  to 
admit  the  intervention  of  supernatural  ])Ower  to  account  for  every 
unusual  phenomenon.  It  belongs  to  the  metaphysical  stage,  to 
ignore  all  such  supernatural  interpositions,  to  bring  in  the  idea  of 
abstract  forces,  and  to  personify  them  under  the  one  agency  of 
Nature.  While  it  belongs  to  the  last,  the  age  of  advanced  science, 
to  exclude  all  search  into  causes,  and  to  apply  itself  to  palpable 
phenomena,  their  relations  and  laws,  so  as  to  classify  and  gene- 
ralize them.  David,  in  a  distant  age,  looked  upward,  and  said, 
"  The  heavens  declare  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  firmament  sheweth 
his  handiwork.  O  Lord,  our  Lord,  how  excellent  is  thy  name  in 
all  the  earth  !  who  hast  set  thy  glory  above  the  heavens."  Newton 
declared  that  "  every  true  step"  made  in  inductive  philosophy,  is  to 
be  liighlv  valued,  because  it  brings  us  nearer  to  the  Fii'st  Cause." 
"A  GodVithout  dominion,  providence,  and  final  causes,"  said  the 
author  of  the  "  Principia,"  "  is  nothing  but  fate  and  nature."  And 
again,  remarks  that  greatest  name  in  science,  "  it  no  doubt  belongs 
to  natural  philosophy,  to  inquire  concerning  God  from  the  obser- 
vation of  phenomena."  But  according  to  tlie  great  French  i^hilo- 
sopher,  David  lived  in  an  infantile  state  of  society,  when  men 
sought  the  supernatural  in  everything ;  and  Newton  was  fettered 
in  liis  glorious  career  of  discovery  by  the  theological  chimera  of  a 
Providence  and  a  God.  These  heavens  and  this  earth,  the  bare 
contemplation  of  which  has  filled  with  holy  rapture  many  of  the 
greatest  minds  of  our  race,  and  the  investigation  into  the  pheno- 
mena of  which  has  drawn  a  Newton  and  others  nearer  to  God, 
are,  in  the  view  of  Augustus  Comte,  and  his  disciples,  but  a  mag- 
nificent piece  of  mechanism,  in  the  harmonious  movements  of 
which  nothing  higher  is  to  be  recognised  than  mechanical  laws. 
It  is  said  of  the  ancient  Epicureans  that  they  Ijelieved  in  the 
existence  of  the  gods,  but  neither  believed  tiiem  to  have  created 
nor  to  govern  the^  universe.  And  if  the  brilliant  French  philo- 
sopher admits  a  God  at  all,  he  excludes  Him  from  creation  and 
dominion,  by  resolving  this  goodly  universe,  both  in  its  formation 
and  government,  into  the  spontaneous  operation  of  purely  phy- 


oi  >;aturalisji;  or,  the  denial 

sical  principles.  The  system  wliicli  is  impressed  \>y  Lis  great 
name,  if  not  absolutely  atheistical,  looks  certainly  in  that  direction, 
and  is,  to  say  the  least,  as  massive  a  structure  of  naturalism  as 
ever  scientific  genius  exhi])ited  to  the  world. 

It  might  have  been  expected  that  such  a  work  of  profound 
science,  characterised  as  it  is  by  high  intellectual  j^owers,  would 
be  greatly  prized  by  the  scientific  men  of  our  own  country.     But' 
assuredly  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  author  of  so  useful  a  book 
as  "A  Biographical  History  of  Philosophy,"  should  be  found  iden- 
tifying himself  with  so  much  of  its  most  objectionable  principles. 
Speaking  of  Comte's  system  as  the  key  to  decipher  past  history, 
Mr.  Lewes  says,^'=  "when  we  sefe  so  great  a  writer  as  Niebuhr  un- 
able to  give  any  other  explanation  of  the  stability  and  progress  of 
the  Koman  people,  than  that  of  destiny — unable  to  read  any  signs 
but  those  of  the  '  finger  of  God' — it  is  high  time  to  bestir  ourselves 
to  rid  the  world  of  this  supernatural  method  of  explaining  facts." 
It  is  striking  and  gratifying  that  about  the  same  time  that  this 
little  work,  in  a  cheap  form,  is  endeavouring  to  propagate  such 
principles  among  us,  one  of  the  most  graphic  historical  works f 
that  was  ever  given  to  the  world,  and  embracing  one  of  the  most 
remarkable  portions  of  the  world's  history,  should  follow  as  its 
guiding  star,  the  sentiment  "God  in  histor3^" — And,  to  say  the 
least,  it  is  surely  more  philosophical  to  believe  that  the  Supreme 
Being  operates  through  the  medium  of  natvual  laws,  than  that 
these  laws  are  independent  of  the  Lavf -maker,  —  that  the  world 
with  all  its  grand  and  beautiful  phenomena,  and  that  history  \^^th 
all  its  marvels,  bear  traces  of  the  directing  finger  of  God,  than 
that  all  should  be  wrapped  up  in  an  iron  chain  of  necessary  de- 
velopment.    "  The  finger  of  Providence  was  on  me,"  said  the  Duke 
of  Wellington,  in  one  of  the  brief  notes  that  he  despatched  from  the 
field  of  Waterloo ;  and  this  sentiment,  expressed  at  the  close  of 
the  dreadful  fight  that  decided  the  fate  of  nations,  and  under  a 
solemnizing  impression  of  the  many  brave  that  had  fallen,  belongs, 
we  are  told,  to  the  lowest  stage  of  human  intelligence  !     "  I  had 
rather,"  said  Bacon  —  and  the  remark  is  as  applicable  to  the  denial 
of  Divine  Providence  as  to  the  denial  of  the  Divine  Existence  — 
"  1  had  rather  believe  all  the  fables  in  the  Legend,  and  the  Talmud, 
and  the  Alcoran,  than  that  this  universal  frame  is  without  a  mind."]; 

*  Biograpliical  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  iv.  p.  258. 

+  D'Aubigne's  History  of  the  Refoi-mation. 

t  M.  Comte  is  not  inactive  in  carrying  out  his  principles.  lie  knows  that  man 
will  worship.  But  he  is  determined,  as  much  as  in  him  lies,  to  lerid  France  p.nd 
the  other  European  nations  from  the  worship  of  the  supernatural  to  an  idolatry 
of  science  or  a  systematic  worship  of  humanity.  With  a  view  of  utterly  exploding 
the  theological  element,  he  has  recently  constructed  a  "  Positive  Calendar"  of 
Infidel  Worship,  on  the  model  of  the  festivals  and  saints'  days  of  the  Romish 
Church.  It  is  nothing  more  than  a  public  periodic  commemoration  of  great  men; 
and  while  Moses  and  Paul  have  a  place  in  it  with  such  heroes  as  Confucius  .and 
Mahomet  and  VoHaire,  the  diviue  man,  the  model  man,  Jesus  Christ,  is  ignored. 


OF  THE    DIVINE    movlDENTIAL   GOVERNMENT.  55 

A  work  producing  considerable  excitement,  calling  forth  a  storm 
of  opposition  from  the  man  of  science  and  the  divine,  and  which 
excludes  God  as  effectually  from  the  concerns  of  the  universe,  as 
that  to  which  we  have  just  adverted,  has,  hut  a  few  years  ago,  pro- 
ceeded from  the  press  of  our  own  country.  We  allude  to  tho 
"Vestiges  of  the  Natural  Histcry  of  Creation."  The  naturalism 
of  this  anonymous  publication,  notwithstanding  the  term  Pi-ovi- 
dence  is  occasionally  on  the  author's  lips,  appears  without  disguise. 
The  theory  is  one  of  those  extreme  systems  of  development,  ac- 
cording to  which  the  world,  with  all  its  varied  phenomena,  moves 
on  in  its  stern  necessary  course,  guided  only  by  physical  laws,  to  the 
exclusion  of  the  Divine  agency.  It  assumes" the  nebular  hypothe- 
sis—  an  hypothesis,  which,  resting  originally  on  insufficient  data, 
i(5  falling  more  and  more  into  discredit  as  science  steadily  advances 
— and  from  the  nebulous  matter  of  space,  which  "  nuist  have  been 
a  universal  fire-mist,"  it  evolves,  on  the  principle  of  pure  physical 
law,  the  whole  system  of  worlds.  Tiiis  universal  fire-mist  "being 
granted,  we  have,  as  it  were,  the  original  germ  of  the  material 
universe.  The  germ  may  have  been  created  by  God,  and  have 
received  from  Him  its  first  impulse,  but  out  of  itself,  and  solely 
through  the  operation  of  physical  laws,  have  been  gradually  un- 
folded those  forms  of  magnificence  and  beauty  which  we  see  in  the 
heavens  and  the  earth.  The  theory  may  admit  of  a  Divine  inter- 
position in  calling  the  original  constituents  of  the  universe  into 
existence,  but  it  dispenses  Avith  or  extrudes  all  Divine  interposition 
in  giving  to  matter  its  wondrous  and  richly-varied  collocations. 
It  may  allow  God  in  the  -beginning  to  utter  his  fiat,  summon 
matter  forth  in  its  shapeless  form  from  the  void,  and  impress  on 
it  certain  laws,  but  it  allows  not  the  Creator  henceforth  to  inter- 
fere with  his  creation  or  even  to  touch  any  of  its  springs  of  motion 
so  that,  after  the  first  creating  act,  He  might  as  well  have  ceased 
to  be.  The  universe,  according  to  this  theory  of  naturalism,  has 
moved  on  in  its  glorious  path  of  evolution,  from  the  hour  of  the  crea- 
tion of  the  nebulse,  without  the  interposition  of  God;  his  existence 
and  agency  being  deemed  necessary  to  give  it  beginning,  but  not 
necessai-y  to  fashion,  dispose,  continue,  and  control  it.  To  the 
questions,  whence  this  universal  fire-mist,  this  nebulous  matter, 
diffused  throughout  space,  and  the  natural  laws  with  which  it  has 
been  endowed,  you  may  get  the  answer,  "  from  God."  But  you 
get  no  such  answer  when  you  ask  who  fasliioned  matter  into  such 
grand  and  beautiful  forms,  and  disposed  them  so  orderly  and  be- 
neficially. The  Most  High  seems  now  to  have  abdicated,  and  to 
have  enthroned  the  physical  laws,  and  left  them  to  mould  and 
govern  the  worlds.  The  Bible,  in  its  sublime  simplicity,  tells  us 
that  "  God  made  two  gTeat  lights ;  the  greater  light  to  rule  the 

These  be  thy  goJs,  O  France,  and  this  worship  of  "  Positive  Thilosophv"  is  fivRt 
to  regenerate  thee  and  then  the  world  ! !— See  North  British  Review,  Ma'y,  18-01. 


56  naturalism;  on,  the  denial 

day,  and  the  lesser  light  to  rule  the  night :  he  made  the  stars  als^o." 
But  the  author  of  the  "  A^estiges"  declares,  "  the  masses  of  space 
are  formed  hy  law  ;  law  makes  them  in  due  time  theatres  of  exist- 
ence for  plants  and  animals."^;-  '•  It  is  impossible,"  he  says,f  "  to 
suppose  a  distinct  exertion  or  fiat  of  Almighty  Power  for  the  form- 
ation of  the  earth,  \^Tought  up  as*  it  is  in  a  complex  dynamical 
connection,  first  with  Venus  on  the  one  hand,  and  Mars  on  the 
other,  and  secondly  with  all  the  other  members  of  the  system." 
And  not  only  so,  but"  he  endeavours  to  interpret  the  first  chapter 
of  Genesis  so  as  to  discountenance  "  special  efforts  of  the  deity." 
The  sublime  expression,  "  Let  light  be,"  indicates  no  special  inter- 
position of  the  great  Creator,  but  merely  a  process  of  law.  And  such 
statements  as — God  made  the  firmament.  God  made  the  beast  of 
the  earth,  &o.,  are  said  "to  occur  subordinately  ....  not  neces- 
sarily to  convey  a  different  idea  of  the  mode  of  creation,  and  in- 
deed only  appear  as  alternative  phrases  in  the  usual  duplicative 
style  of  the  East."|     This  is  naturalism  without  a  cloak. 

We  dwell  not  here  on  the  strong  presumptive  proof  which 
advancing  science  is  bringing  against  tl>e  nebular  hypothesis. 
The  fact  that  so  many  of  the  supposed  nebulae  have  been  resolved 
into  starry  systems,  makes  it  highly  probable  that  all  are  re- 
solvable. Lord  Piosse's  powerful  telescope  has  revealed  suns  and 
systems  where  nothing  but  dim  nebulse  were  supposed  to  exist. 
And  could  a,nother  instrument  of  considerably  greater  magnifying 
power  be  constructed,  the  hypothesis,  abeady  so  much  damaged, 
might  be  completely  destroyed.  "  As  thrown  out  by  Laplace," 
remarks  Professor  Whewell,§  "it  was  a  mere  conjecture.  It  is  a 
mere  conjecture  still.  Hitherto  it  has  lost  ground  in  the  progress 
of  astronomical  researches."  But  let  us  suppose  it  to  be  true, 
"  that  the  primary  condition  of  matter  was  that  of  a  diff'used  mass, 
in  which  the  component  molecules  were  probably  kept  apart 
tln-ough  the  efficacy  of  heat ;  that  portions  of  this  agglomerated 
into  suns,  wliicli  threw  off  planets;  that  these  2'>lanets  were  at  first 
veiy  nnich  diffused,  but  gradually  contracted  by  cooling  to  tlieir 
present  dimensions  :"||  still,  on  this  supposition,  we  demand  the 
presence  and  agency  of  God.  The  orderly  and  varied  dispositions 
of  matter  bespeak  a  Divine  interposition,  as  well  as  the  origination 
of  matter  itself  In  view  of  the  collocations  and  motions  of  the 
material  system,  we  no  less  naturally  infer  a  Divine  Providence 
than  in  thiiaking  of  the  existence  of  matter  we  infer  the  agency  of 
the  creating  God.  The  d posteriori  argument  has  as  firm  a  footing 
amid  these  collocations,  as  it  has  on  the  existence  of  matter, 
and  its  laws.  Yea,  more ;  it  is  in  these  collocations  that  we  see  the 
most  legible  evidences  of  design,  and  it  is  not  so  jnuch  from  thelDare 

*  Ve-'tiges,?.  372, 5th  etl.  +  IbiJ.  p.  20!.  $  Ibid.  p.  167,  5th  ed. 

§  Indications  of  the  Cretitor.  p.  07,  Snd  ed.  H  Vestiges,  p.  4D,  5th  cd. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PEOVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  57 

existence  of  matter  as  from  its  dispositions  and  motions  that  we  rise 
up  to  the  Great  Designer.  The  nebulous  mass  diffused  throughout 
space,  supposing  such  to  have  existed,  came  not  there  without  the 
fiat  of  the  Almighty;  and  suns  and  planets  were  not  formed  out  of 
that  mass  ^vithout  the  intervention  of  Infinite  Wisdom.  The  Book 
of  Creation,  beautifully  written  and  well  arranged,  points  up  to  the 
Divine  Hand  that  garnished  and  disposed  it,  no  less  than  it  pro- 
claims the  Divine  Power  that  called  from  nothingness  the  materials 
of  which  it  is  composed.  The  author  of  the  "  Vestiges"  tells  us 
that  law  formed  the  masses  of  space  into  goodly  theatres  of 
existence  for  plants  and  animals.  But  what  are  natural  laws 
without  a  Divine  intelligence  working  in  them  and  by  them? 
Not  realities  but  merely  abstractions.  The  existence  of  law  not 
more  truly  presupposes  the  Lawgiver,  +han  does  the  harmonious 
and  uniform  operation  of  law  indicate  the  presence  and  control  of 
the  Governor.  It  is  quite  an  illusion  to  speak  of  the  laws  of 
nature  as  if  they  were  things  distinct  from  the  natural  phenomena, 
and  to  invest  them,  like  independent  deities,  with  fashioning  and 
regulating  powers.  "  if  is  a  perversion  of  language,"  says  Dr. 
Paley,=-  "  to  assign  any  law,  as  the  eflicient  operative  cause  of  any 
thing.  A  law  presupposes  an  agent;  for  it  is  only  the  mode,  ac- 
cording to  which  an  agent  proceeds :  it  implies  a  power,  for  it  is 
the  order  according  to  which  that  power  acts.  Without  this  agent, 
without  this  power,  which  are  both  distinct  from  itself,  the  law 
does  nothing ;  is  nothing."  "  Opus,"  remarks  Lord  Bacon,  "  quod 
operatur  Deus  a  primordio  usque  ad  finem." 

But  this  theory  of  progi"essive  development  explains  how  the 
world  was  peopled,  as  well  as  how  it  was  fonned.  It  includes 
within  its  sweep  both  the  animate  and  inanimate  phenomena  of 
the  universe.  It  w^ould  not  only  evol.ve  from  a  universal  fire- 
mist,  and  by  the  exclusive  operation  of  physical  law,  all  the  forms 
which  matter  has  assumed,  but  it  would  trace  the  whole  organised 
system,  in  a  regularly  advancing  series,  up  from  an  infusorial 
13oint  to  the  noblest  being,  man.  "  No  organism  is,  nor  ever  has 
one  been  created,"  is  the  language  of  a  chief  philosopher  of  this 
school.f  "  which  is  not  microscopic.  Whatever  is  larger  has  not 
been  created  but  developed.  Man  has  not  been  created  but  de- 
veloped." "  AVe  call  in  question,"  says  the  author  of  the  "  Ves- 
tiges,"! "  not  merely  the  simple  idea  of  the  unenlightened  mind, 
that  God  fashioned  all  in  the  manner  of  an  artificer  seeking  by 
special  means  to  produce  special  effects,  but  even  the  doctrine  in 
vogue  amongst  men  of  science,  that '  creative  fiats '  were  required 
for  each  new  class,  order,  family,  and  species  of  organic  beings,  as 
they  successively  took  their  places  upon  the  globe,  or  as  the  globe 

*  XatnvaJ  Tlieology,  vol.  i.i  pp.  9, 10.    (Knight's  edition.) 

t  rrol'cssoi-  Okexi.  t  Vestiges,  p.  IGl,  otli  ediliou. 


58  naturalism;   or,   the    DEr^iai:, 

became  gradually  fitted  for  their  reception."  Accordiug  to  tlie 
Bible,  "  Grod  said,  Let  us  make  man  in  our  image,  after  our  like- 
ness. So  God  created  man  in  bis  own  image,  in  the  image  of 
God  created  He  him."  But,  according  to  this  theory,  God  created 
only  microscopic  monads  or  embryotic  points,  and  from  these,  by 
a  process  of  natural  development  extending  through  cycles  of 
ages,  arose  all  the  animated  tribes.  Creatures  of  "  the  simplest 
and  most  pr-imitive  type  gave  birth  to  a  type  superior  to  it  in  com- 
positeness  of  organization  and  endowment  of  faculties  ;  tliis  again 
produced  the  next  higher,  and  so  on  to  the  highest;  the  advance 
being,  in  all  cases,  small,  but  not  of  any  determinate  extent."^- 
Man  was  not  then  the  special  workmanshi})  of  the  living  God. 
Moses  is  to  be  understood  as  speaking  of  ordinary  law  when  he 
says,  "  The  Lord  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  gi-ound,  and 
breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life."  David's  devotion  is 
to  be  set  down  as  enthusiasm,  when,  addressing  God,  he  exclaimed, 
"  Thou  madest  man  a  little  lower  than  the  angels."  We  must  go 
back  to  the  infusorial  point,  "  whose  seed  was  in  itself,"  for  the 
germ  of  human  existence,  and  then,  in  retracing  our  steps,  notice 
iiow  throughout  the  whole  marvellous  process  there  is  no  mixture 
of  the  supernatural.  The  Creator  is  thus  bidden  to  retire  to  the 
utmost  bound  of  creation.  No  room  is  left  for  Him  to  interpose 
and  create  new  species.  He  gave  the  first  impulse  at  a  dateless 
period  in  the  past,  and  all  subsequent  formations  and  dispositions, 
however  wondrous  and  varied,  are  the  necessary  results  of  fixed 
laws.  This  is  the  order  of  God's  universe !  Yea  :  "  the  system 
ought  to  be  described  as  a  System  of  Order  in  icliich  life  grows  out 
of  dead  matter,  the  higher  out  of  the  lower  animals,  and  man  out  of 
hrutcs."j- 

The  theory  is  no  less  opposed  to  the  well-ascertained  facts  of 
science  than  it  is  to  the  scriptural  record.  The  most  illustrious 
names  in  the  scientific  world  have  condemned  it.  Geology,  as  it 
unfolds  leaf  after  leaf  of  the  "  great  stone  book,"  gives  the  lie  to  it. 
The  maxim  is  indeed  true  :  Natura  non  operatur  per  saltum,  un- 
derstanding that  "  Nature  is  but  a  name  for  an  effect,  wliose  cause 
is  God. "I  But  it  is  a  wild  fancy,  a  reckless  mode  of  philoso- 
])hising,  to  conclude  that  since  tiicre  are  no  gaps  in  nature,  there 
have  been  no  interpositions  of  the  Creator  from  the  period  when 
He  formed  the  first  and  smallest  organism.  The  stars  in  their 
harmonious  courses  have  been  called  to  fight  against  God,  and 
now  the  orderly  gradations  of  the  vegetable  and  animal  kingdoms 
are  summoned  to  give  eviden'.e  against  his  agency  and  dominion. 
But  the  earth  beneath  and  t.:e  heavens  above  refuse  to  be  per- 
jured.    And,  as  Dr.  Chalmers  has  remarked,  "  these  two  doctrines, 

*  Vestiges,  p.  2.32,  5th  edition. 
+  WhfcWuU's  ludications,  p.  12,  2acl  edition.  i  Cowpcr. 


OF    IflK    DIVINE   PROVIDENTIAL   GOVERNMENT.  59 

tlie  all  but  universal  faith  of  naturalists,  that  there  is  no  spon- 
taneous generation  and  no  transmutation  of  the  species,  are  two 
denials,  in  fact,  of  nature's  sufficiency  for  the  origination  of  oiu- 
races,  and  shut  us  up  unto  the  faith  of  nature's  God."  Had  the 
development  theory  been  founded  in  truth,  it  is  obvious  that  tlie 
earlier  fossils  woidd  have  been  very  small  in  size  and  very  low  in 
organisation.  But  such  is  not  the  case.  We  meet  with  giants 
where  we  should  have  found  dwarfs,  and  creatures  of  a  high  organi- 
zation instead  of  creatures  of  a  low  one.  In  the  last,  and  one  of 
the  ablest  replies  to  this  fanciful  hypothesis,  Mr.  Hugh  Miller 
shows  that  the  oldest  ganoids  yet  known  are,  both  as  to  size  and 
organization,  in  direct  opposition  to  it.  "  Up  to  a  certain  point  hi 
the  geologic  scale  vv^e  find  that  the  ganoids  are  not;  and  when 
they  at  length  make  their  appearance  upon  the  stage,  they  enter 
large  in  their  stature  and  high  in  their  organization."*  The 
Fossil  Flora  also  contradicts  it.  At  the  base  of  the  Old  Red 
Sandstone  where,  according  to  the  development  theory,  "  nothing 
higher  than  a  lichen  or  a  moss  could  have  been  exjiected,  the 
ship-carpenter  might  have  hopefully  taken  axe  in  hand  to  explore 
the  woods  for  some  such  stately  pine  as  the  one  described  by 
Milton. "f  The  stubborn  facts  of  science  thus  conflict  with  this 
baseless  theory,  a  theory  adopted  before  ever  geology  had  a  place 
among  the  inductive  sciences,  and  which  no  eminent  geologist  is 
found  to  advocate.  We  are  warranted,  then,  with  the  autlior  of 
the  "  Footprints,"  to  say :  "  Had  an  intelligent  being,  ignorant  of 
what  was  going  on  upon  earth  during  the  week  of  creation,  visited 
Eden  on  the  morning  of  the  sixth  day,  he  would  have  found  in  it 
many  of  the  inferior  animals,  but  no  trace  of  man.  Had  he  re- 
turned again  in  the  evening,  he  would  have  seen,  installed  in  the 
office  of  keepers  of  the  garden,  and  ruling  with  no  tyrant  sway  as 
the  humble  monarchs  of  its  brute  inhabitants,  two  mature  human 
creatures,  perfect  in  their  organisation,  and  arrived  at  the  full 
stature  of  their  race.  The  entire  evidence  regarding  them,  in  the 
absence  of  all  such  information  as  that  imparted  to  Adam  by 
Milton's  angel,  would  amount  simply  to  this,  that  in  the  morning 
man  mas  not,  and  that  in  the  evening  he  leas.  There,  of  course, 
could  not  exist,  in  the  circumstances,  a  single  appearance  to  sanc- 
tion the  belief  that  the  two  human  creatures  whom  he  saw  walking 
together  among  the  trees  at  sunset,  had  been  '  developed  from 
infusorial  points,'  not  created  matm-e.  The  evidence  would,  on 
the  contrary-,  lie  all  the  other  way."]:  Such  is  at  once  the  evidence 
of  Scripture  and  geology.  The  "  vestiges  of  the  natural  history  of 
the  creation"  become  the  "footprints  of  the  Creator,"  and  vjiin 
becomes  the  attempt  to  explain  the  world's  genealogies  so  as  to 
banish  fi'om  it  the  Omnipotent  Father  and  Sovereign  Lord. 

*  Footprints,  p.  lOJ.  t  Ibiil.  p.  120.  f  Ibid.  p.  104. 


GO  KATUEALISM  ;    OR,   THE    DENIAL 

In  tliG  clomnin  of  physical  research,  the  "Cosmos"  of  Hum- 
boldt, a  work  of  considerable  value  and  popularity,  bears  on  it  the 
stamp  of  naturalism.  Unlike  the  book  on  which  we  have  been 
animadverting,  it  propounds  no  theory  to  account  for  the  forma- 
tion and  peopling  of  the  world,  though  the  author  favours  the  ne- 
bular hypothesis,  but  gives,  what  it  professes  to  do,  a  physical 
description  of  the  universe.  It  is  more  guilty  by  its  omissions 
than  by  its  assertions,  though  in  some  of  tnese  the  naturalism  is 
obvious  enough.  It  is  the  most  striking  illustration,  with  which 
we  are  acquainted,  of  a  work  setting  aside  the  docti-ine  of  Divine 
Providence  by  maintainnig  a  studied  silence  respecting  it,  when 
the  author,  if  a  believer  in  the  doctrine,  would  have  been  naturally 
led  by  his  subject  to  advert  to  it.  It  is  just  as  if  one  were  to 
give  a  glowing  description  of  the  pictures  of  Raphael  without 
alluding' to  the  genius  of  the  artist ;  just  as  if  Addison  and  Macau- 
lay,  in  their  dissertations  on  the  grand  poem  of  "  Paradise  Lost," 
had  never  mentioned  Milton,  "  that  mighty  orb  of  song,"  or,  as 
has  been  remarked,*  just  as  if  a  critic  were  to  give  a  correct  and 
eloquent  account  of  the  contents  of  "  Cosmos"  itself,  without  refer- 
ring to  its  illustrious  author,  and  the  mental  manifestation  which 
he  has  made  of  himself  in  its  pages.  Baron  Humboldt,  in  this 
work,  makes  no  reference  to  a  living  omnipresent  God.  He  sinks 
the  spiritual  in  the  material.  He  can,  with  much  picturesque  ani- 
mation of  st3de,  exhibit  the  phenomenal  harmony  of  the  heavens, 
and  describe  his  path  from  the  remotest  nebula  to  the  minutest 
organism,  and  ignore  Him  who  is  the  source  of  all  that  life  and 
order.  We  perused  a  considerable  portion  of  this  interesting  book 
while  wandering  on  a  lovely  day  of  June  over  a  beautiful  tract 
of  country,  and  were  struck  with  the  contrast  between  its  repeated 
references  to  the  active  forces  of  nature  and  no  reference  to  na- 
ture's God,  and  the  glorious  volume  of  creation  that  lay  open  be- 
fore us,  every  page  and  line  of  which  were  radiant  with  the  Crea- 
tor s  glory,  and  spoke  of  His  power,  wisdom,  and  goodness.  We 
lifted  the  eye  from  the  page  of  the  philosophic  traveller  to  the 
grand  scenery  above  and  around  us,  and  involuntarily  asked,  is 
there,  then,  amid  this  magnificent  spectacle  of  earth  and  sky  no 
other  power  pervading  and  animating  the  whole  but  physical 
forces  ?  We  wondered  to  what  specific  cause  it  was  to  be  attributed, 
that  so  keen  and  enthusiastic  an  observer  of  natural  phenomena 
could,  "  in  the  late  evening  of  an  active  life,"  present  a  sketch  of 
a  Physical  Description  of  the  Universe,  "  whose  undefi»ed  image 
had  floated  before  his  mind  for  almost  half  a  century,"  in  which 
no  reference  is  made  to  the  Eternal  One,  but  in  the  outset  of  which, 
as  if  to  prevent  disappointment,  he  uses  such  language  as  the  fol- 
lowing: "  In  reflecting  upon  physical  piienomena  and  events,  and 
tracing  their  causes  by  the  i)rocess  of  reason,  we  become  more 

*  Dr,  Harris's  Man  PrimevaJ.  p.  313. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  ()  I 

and  more  convinced  of  the  truth  of  the  ancient  doctrine,  that  the 
forces  inherent  in  matter,  and  those  which  govern  the  moral  world, 
exercise  their  action  under  the  control  of  primordial  necessity, 
and  in  accordance  with  movements  occm-ring  periodically  after 
longer  or  shorter  intervals."  =:=  The  illustrious  German,  after  hav- 
ing travelled  over  a  considerable  portion  of  the  earth's  surface, 
and  made  himself  acquainted  with  all  that  is  at  present  known  of 
the  physical  phenomena  of  the  universe,  thus  acknowledges,  in  the 
midst  of  his  fourscore  years,  no  higher  agency  than  inherent  ma- 
terial forces  acting  under  the  government  of  a  primordial  neces- 
sity. Divine  Providence  is  thus  interdicted,  and  this  goodly  uni- 
verse moves  onward,  unfolding  its  forms  of  life  and  grandeur, 
without  the  hand  of  Him  tliat  made  it.  This  may  consist  with 
Hegelianism,  or  with  some  other  form  of  the  transcendental  phi- 
losopliy,  but  it  does  not  consist  with  the  deeper  philosophy  ot 
man's  inward  nature.  It  7night  do  if  we  had  heads  and  no  hearts. 
The  intellect  may  rest  in  it  for  a  while,  but  the  soul  with  its  ca- 
pacities and  cravings  cannot  repose  there  for  a  moment.  Oiu-  very 
heart-strings  must  be  torn  out,  the  emotional  part  of  our  nature 
must  be  over-borne,  and  all  om-  upward  aspirations  repressed, 
before  we  can  be  satisfied  with  this  thing  of  fate,  this  primordial 
necessity,  in  the  room  of  the  living  and  ever-ruling  God.  Even 
in  an  aesthetic  view  this  metl^od  of  philosophising  stands  con- 
demned. Robert  Hall  has  truly  said :  "  The  exclusion  of  a 
Supreme  Being  and  of  a  superintending  Providence,  tends  directly 
to  the  destruction  of  moral  taste.  It  robs  the  universe  of  all 
finished  and  consummate  excellence,  even  in  idea." 

Combe's  "  Constitution  of  Man,"  a  work  of  vastly  wider  circula- 
tion, and  more  adapted  to  the  masses  of  the  people  than  any  to 
which  we  have  referred,  is,  notwithstanding  much  tliat  is  valuable 
in  the  book,  notorious  for  its  naturalism.  Mr.  Combe  and  his 
school  are  not  satisfied  with  discarding  ignorant  and  superstitious 
notions  about  Providence.  But  their  philosophy  explodes  the 
very  idea  of  a  Providence  who  controls  and  orders  all  things,  and 
without  wliose  permission  not  even  a  sparrow  can  fall  to  the 
groujid.  We  meet,  in  such  writers,  with  much  that  is  worthy  of 
attention  respecting  the  influence  of  natural  lav/s  both  on  physical 
liealth  and  mental  and  moral  training,  and  tlie  evil  consequences 
of  disregarding  or  violating  these  laws.  And  we  are  quite  willing 
to  admit  with  the  author  of  the  "  Vestiges,"  that  to  Mr.  Combe's 
Essay,  among  other  publications,  "may  be  ascribed  no  small 
share  of  that  public  movement  towards  improved  sanitary  regular 
tions  which  is  one  of  the  most  cheering  features  of  our  age."f 
But  the  good  in  this  respect  is  more  than  counterbalanced  by  the 
evil  of  erecting  the  natural  laws  into  a  sort  of  independent  control, 
and  holding  out  this  principle  as  the  true  key  to  the  government 
*  Cosmos,  vol.  i.  p.  30.  t  Vesiiges,  p.  397,  SUi  edilion. 


C2  natcjralism;  or,  the  denial 

of  the  -world. t-  It  is  a  good  service  to  rescue  natural  laws  from 
the  hands  of  ignorance  and  superstition,  and  to  set  forth  their 
operations  in  a  clear  light.  Mr.  Combe  has,  in  some  measure, 
done  this.  But  evil  is  done  when  these  laws  are  taken,  as  it  were, 
out  of  the  hand  of  the  superintending  Lawgiver,  when  either  a 
studied  silence  about  God  as  working  in  and  by  them  is  preserved, 
or  intimations  given  that  they  are  all  in  all,  and  that  God  does  not 
interfere  witli  their  operations.  And  Mr.  Combe  and  Ids  school 
have  done  this. 

It  is  the  extreme  of  superstition  or  fanaticism,  to  repose  implicit 
faith  in  Divine  Providence  while  neglecting  or  going  counter 
to  the  clearly-defined  laws  of  the  human  constitution,  or  those 
whicli  regiilate  the  physical  and  moral  worlds.  The  type  of 
such  fanaticism  is  to  be  seen  in  the  man  who  expects,  as  it 
were,  bread  to  drop  from  the  clouds  into  his  mouth,  or  treasures 
to  fall  into  his  pockets  from  the  same  source,  while  doggedly 
refusing  to  work.  But  it  is  rushing  to  a  godless  extreme,  the 
extreme  of  naturalism,  to  rest  in  mere  secondary  agencies 
without  rising  upward  to  Him  who  touches  all  the  springs  of 
action,  or  to  ignore  His  presence  in  and  superintendence  over  the 
world.  It  is  confessedly  mysterious  how  human  instrumentality 
and  Divine  agency  blend  in  bringing  about  events.  But  the 
mystery  of  things  is  not  a  whit  lessened  in  cutting  the  link  that 
connects  the  two  together,  in  virtually  saying,  let  us  loose  our 
hold  of  the  heavens  above,  and  attach  ourselves  exclusively  to  the 
earth  and  things  therein.  Is  the  world's  history,  or  is  individual 
history,  less  mysterious,  by  shutting  out  from  the  sphere  of  human 
things  the  Divine  Providence,  and  leaving  room  for  nothing  but 
the  operation  of  natural  laws?  Or  rather  is  not  all  history,  by 
such  an  exclusion,  made  much  more  mysterious  than  ever?  In  the 
one  case,  we  have  the  human  agency  moving  freely  under  the 
moral  control  of  the  Divine,  we  have  in  full  i)lay  the  elements  of 
human  action  and  piety,  and  yet  mysterious  relations.  In  the 
other  case,  we  have  only  the  human  agent  and  the  physical  and 
moral  laws,  we  have  excluded  the  hand  of  God  and  taken  away 
the  elements  of  piety,  and  still  the  relations  are  mysterious.  The 
choice  then  lies  between  a  mysterious  world  in  which  God  is  ever 
present  and  ever  felt,  and  a  mysterious  world  that  moves  onward 
in  its  glorious  evolutions  without  His  continued  agency.  He  is 
the  better  philosopher  and  the  happier  man  who  prefei-s  the 
former,  and  holds  a  key  to  things  inscrutable  which  can  never  be 
solved  by  the  man  who  chooses  the  latter. 

Mr.  Combe  sets  up  for  a  reformer,  the  advocate  of  a  philosophy 
which  would  turn  the  pulpits  of  our  churches  and  the  chairs  ol 

*  Constitution  of  Jlan,  p.  6,  People's  Eclitiou  (Oih). 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  63 

our  schools  upside  (3own.=;=  Spiritual  religion  must  be  supplanted 
"  by  teaching  mankind  the  philosophy  of  their  own  nature  and  of 
the  world  in  which  they  live."  Human  depravity  is  a  doctrine 
which  he  cannot  away  with,  and  it  is  set  down  to  "  an  age  when 
there  Avas  no  sound  philosophy,  and  almost  no  knowledge  of 
physical  science."f  That  Christianity  is  "  a  system  of  spiritual . 
influences,  of  internal  operations  on  the  soul,"  is  the  representa- 
tion "  of  men  who  knew  extremely  little  of  the  science  of  either 
external  nature  or  the  human  mind."!  Prayer  has  no  power  with 
God,  but  is  merely  reflex  in  its  influence,  affecting  only  the  mind 
of  the  petitiouer.§  And  death  is  not,  ||  as  Moses  and  Paul  have 
written,  and  Milton  sung,  the  penal  effect  of  man's  first  dis- 
obedience. Hence  the  necessity,  as  he  asserts,  of  the  religious 
instructors  of  mankind  being  taught  over  again,  aud  of  "a  new 
direction"  being  given  to  their  pursuits.  He  means  modestly  to 
insinuate,  that  were  it  possible  to  summon  such  men  as  Butler 
and  Edwards,  Howe  and  Charnock,  Hall  and  Chalmers,  '*  men 
who  knew  extremely  little  of  the  science  of  either  external  nature 
or  the  human  mind,"  back  again  to  this  world,  they  would  have 
to  learn,  in  his  own  school,  the  philosophy  of  human  nature  and 
material  things,  in  order  to  prove,  in  this  age,  efi'ective  insti-uctors 
of  mankind!  Not  to  dwell,  however,  on  the  inconsistency  of 
such  statements  with  facts,  we  readily  grant  that  there  is  much 
in  them  consistent  with  naturalism  or  the  denial  of  Divine  Pro- 
vidence. It  is  with  such  a  denial  that  we  have  now  to  do.  If, 
as  Mr.  Combe  asserts,^  " suj^ernatura]  agency  has  long  since 
ceased  to  interfere  with  human  affairs,"  then  it  were  time  that 
spiritual  Christianity  should  give  place  to  a  philosophy  of  nature, 
and  that  the  worshippers  of  God  were  asking  what  profit  should 
we  have  if  we  pray  to  Him?^=*  But  if,  as  seems  to  be  admitted, 
Buch  an  agency  once  interposed  in  the  concerns  of  the  world,  why 
may  not  that  agency  be  there  still,  operating  through  the  medium 
of  those  natural  laws  which  the  school  of  Combe  would  exalt  into 
a  sort  of  independent  dominion  ? 

There  is  a  double  illusion  into  which  writers  of  this  class  fall 
when  speaking  of  natural  phenomena.  In  the  first  place,  they 
represent  the  laws  of  nature,  not,  as  they  really  are,  modes  of  the 
Divine  procedure,  but  as  if  they  were  real  and  independent 
existences.  And  then  they  suppose  that  because  things  happen 
according  to  fixed  laws,  the  Divine  agency  cannot  be  in  them. 
This,  viewed  merely  as  a  philosophy,  not  to  speak  of  its  utter 
repugnance  to  Scripture,  is  extremely  supefficial.     Men,  by  know- 

*  Constitution  of  Man.  pp.  00, 100.  t  Ibid.  p.  4.  i  Ibid.  p.  92, 

i  Ibid.  p.  9r).  ;i  Ibid.  p.  58.  51  Ibid.  p.  90. 

**  Cicero,  speaking  of  the  philosophers  of  this  school — not  the  "magni  atqtio 

nobiles,"  —  asks:  "quorum  si  vera  sententia  osl,  qua3  potest  esse  pietas  ?  qi.as 

sanctitas  ?  qure  religio  "/ '  —  Pe  Nat.  Deorxnn,  lib.  i. 


61  naturalism;  or,  the  denial 

iiig,  and  adapting  themselves  to,  fixed  laws,  can  often  work  out 
their  own  will.  But  this  does  not  warrant  the  conclusion  that 
the  Divine  Lawgiver  cannot  or  does  not,  in  such  cases,  make 
them  subservient  to  the  accomplishment  of  His  higher  will.  An 
army,  at  the  will  of  a  monarch  bent  on  enlarged  dominion,  is 
marched  into  a  foreign  state;  or  a  voyage  of  discovery  is  made  for 
mere  commercial  ends.  The  designs  of  men  in  both  instances 
are  served.  But  the  accomplishment  of  a  much  higher  design,  to 
which  these  inferior  ones  are  rendered  tributary,  follows.^  The 
gospel  of  peace  enters  into  the  respective  territories,  civilisation 
comes  in  its  train,  and  by  the  truth  multitudes  ai-e  made  free. 
God's  will  was  thus  paramount ;  and,  under  His  moral  control,^  the 
human  will,  acting  by  the  fixed  laws,  was  made  the  pliant  minister 
of  the  Divine.  Take  one  of  Combe's  own  examples.  In  the  reign 
of  Charles  the  Second,  London  was,  in  a  great  measure,  depopu- 
lated by  the  jDlague.  "  Most  people  of  that  age,"  says  he,>:=  "  attri- 
buted the  scourge  to  the  inscrutable  decrees  of  Providence,  and 
so]ne  to  the  magnitude  of  the  nation's  moral  iniquities."  But, 
according  to  his  views,  "  there  was  nothing  inscrutable  in  its 
causes  or  objects. — These  appear  to  have  had  no  direct  reference 
to  the  moral  condition  of  the  people;"  and  the  calamity  "must 
have  arisen  from  infringement  of  the  organic  laws,  and  have  been 
intended  to  enforce  stricter  obedience  to  them  in  future."  Now 
we  ask,  can  disease  or  suffering  not  be  an  infringement  of  organic 
laws,  and  also  a  dispensation  of  Providence  ?  Mr.  Combe  assumes 
that  it  cannot ;  and  because  an  individual  or  a  community,  neg- 
lectful of  sanitary  conditions,  falls  a  victim  to  plague,  we  are  to 
believe  that  the  natural  violation  leaves  no  room  for  the  Divine 
operation.  This,  however,  is  nothing  less  than  an  assumption,  an 
assamption  too,  which  fails  to  account  for  much  of  the  aflBictive 
hd^^  in  the  history  of  individuals  and  communities.  The  human, 
or  secondary  agencies  do  not  exclude  the  Divine  or  first  agency, 
the  natural  laws  by  no  means  supersede  the  presence  and  inter- 
position of  the  Lawgiver.  Mr.  Morell,  speaking  of  these  secondary 
agencies,  justly  remarks  :  "  They  are  all  under  the  moral  control 
of  Deity  from  first  to  last,  so  that  the  penalty,  which  seems  at  first 
to  be  simply  the  result  of  brealdng  a  natural  law,  is  really  an 
effect  of  that  providential  power  which  governs  the  world."  And 
what  he  says  of  the  world's  history,  may  be  said  of  the  history  of 
many  a  community  and  individual:  "To  the  man  wlio  looks  un- 
believingly upon  Divine  Providence,  the  world's  history  is  a 
problem  that  can  never  be  solved."f 

Combe's  view  of  prayer, — bolstered  up  though  it  be  by  such 
names  as  Lord  Kames,*Dr.  Hugh  Blair,  and  Professor  Leechman,| 

*  Combe's  Constitution  of  Man,  p.  36, 

t  ^Morell's  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.,p.  571. 

i  Comhe's  Constitution  of  Man,  pp.  9-5,  9G. 


Of    THE    DIVINE    PI{0VIX)ENT1AL   GOVERNMENT.  05 

men  of  no  high  authority,  verily,  in  such  matters, — stands  con- 
demned also  as  most  unnatural,  not  to  say  most  unsciiptural.  It 
is,  indeed,  quite  of  a  piece  with  his  philosophy,  but  it  consists  not 
with  the  deeper  philosophy  of  the  heart  and  the  Bible.  Men  have 
never  prayed  under  the  persuasion  that  the  sole  eiiicacy  of  prayer 
is  reflex,  that  it  has  an  influence  only  upon  the  mind  of  the  wor- 
shipper. The  Avisest  and  best  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  the 
unsophisticated  childi-en  of  the  desert,  as  well  as  the  most  enlig]it- 
ened  and  devout  Christians,  have  resorted  to  prayer  under^  the 
conviction  tliat  it  is  efiectual  to  secure  blessings  directly  from 
above.  The  reflex  influence  of  prayer  is  valuable,  but  the  value 
is  realised  just  in  proportion  as  the  heart  goes  out  after  the  direct 
influence.  A  rational  theory  it  truly  is,  which  would  thus  make 
the  value  of  men's  devotions  to  arise  from  men's  illusions  !  The 
reflex  influence  supposes  the  direct  influence,  and  for  men  to 
enjoy  the  former  without  faith  in  the  latter,  resembles,  as  Isaac  Tay- 
lor remarks,*  "  the  supposition  that  we  might  continue  to  enjoy  the 
accommodation  of  moonlight,  even  if  the  sun  were  blotted  from 
the  planetary  system."  As  to  the  stale  objection,  which  is  ever 
and  anon  brought  forth,f  that  the  direct  influence  of  prayer  sup- 
poses that  we  can  alter  the  Divine  determinations,  it  is  sufficient 
to  reply,  that  it  is  according  to  these  determinations  that  nien 
must  ask  in  order  to  receive,  and  knock  in  order  to  the  door  being 
opened.  God  discloses  unto  us  the  treasures  of  liis  grace,  and 
says,  "  I  will  yet  for  these  be  inquired  of." 

What  is  insidiously  taught  by  such  a  writer  as  Combe,  has  been 
advocated  more  boldly,  and  with  less  fear  of  giving  oflence  by  the 
Owen  School.  Eationalism  is  here  defined  to  be  the  science  of 
material  circumstances.  And  the  philosophy  of  Owenism  ignores 
everything  else.  It  denounces  other  systems  for  liaving  spiritual- 
ized" man,  and  it  professes  to  look  upon  him,  to  all  practical 
purposes,  as  a  material  being.  Humanity,  in  its  estimation,  con- 
tains within  itself  the  germs  of  indefinite  moral  improvement,  and 
needs  only  to  be  brought  under  the  genial  influences  of  earth  to 
ripen  into  perfection.  Supernatm-al  aid  is  interdicted  at  the 
threshold,  lest  it  should  beget  an  indifterence  to  self-exertion,  and 
foster  a  habit  of  dependence.  The  first  and  last  lesson  given  to 
its  disciples  is,  that  men's  opinions  and  actions  result  exclusively 
Trom  their  original  susceptibilities,  and  the  influences  of  the  world 
around  them,  over  which  they  liave  no  control.  Hence  its  oft 
repeated  injunction,  Study  yourself  and  mind    external  circum- 

*  Spiritual  Christiauitv,  p.  51.  ,        .     ,       - 

+  Mr.  R.  W.  Mackay,  who,  after  tlie  manner  of  Comhe,  confines  "  the  circle  of 
our  real  knowledge  to  phenomenal  succession  and  its  laws."  witli  all  the  coolness 
of  the  sensational  school,  serves  up  this  oft-refntecl  objection.  He  falsely  assumes 
thr.t  prayer  pr  supposes  changeableness  in  God,  and  then  settles  the  matter  by 
tolling  us  that  the  Creator  is  not  "  to  be  diverted  from  his  purposes  by  entreaty." 
—The  Proi/ress  of  the  Intellect,  vol.  i.  pp.  25,  lOy. 


60  naturalism;  oe,  the  denial 

stances.  This  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  its  commandments. 
It  admits  the  existence  of  error  and  vice  inhumanity,  for  these  are 
too  palpable  to  be  denied,  but  it  charitably  calls  them  misfortunes, 
and,  as  a  remedy  for  all  moral  ills,  insists  on  a  rational  education. 
The  favourite  analogy  of  this  system  is  derived  from  the  influence 
which  the  sun  exerts  upon  the  earth.  This  is  at  once  the  grand 
image  in  its  poetry,  and  the  grand  illustration  of  its  philosophy. 
Human  nature  is  compared  to  the  earth,  and  external  influences 
to  the  sun  which  vivifies  and  adorns  it.  Kationalism  says,  bring 
a  man  of  good  susceptibilities  into  a  favourable  position  as  regards 
external  circumstances,  and  hence  results  a  good  character.  This 
is  the  system,  ushered  forth  with  big  pretensions,  and  propounded 
in  innumerable  little  books  and  pamphlets,  which  is  "  to  renovate 
the  social  state,  recast  and  elevate  humanity !" 

The  crude  elements  of  the  system  have  heen  found  floating  on 
the  surface  of  society  in  every  age.  Its  modern  form  may  be  said 
to  have  been  cut  out  by  Rousseau  and  French  philosophy,  and  to 
have  assumed  a  still  more  palpable  shape  in  the  hands  of  Owen 
and  his  followers.  It  is  gross  naturalism,  naked  and  not  ashamed, 
and  as  such,  though  now  fast  in  the  wane,  it  has  been  gi-eeted  by 
masses  of  the  people  who  were  disposed  to  throw  off  every  species 
of  religion  as  an  intolerable  yoke.  Such  writers  as  the  author  of 
the  "  Vestiges,"  do  not  more  effectually  exclude  Providence  frorn^ 
the  government  of  the  spheres,  and  from  the  whole  domain  of 
natural  history,  than  do  the  disciples  of  the  "  new  moral  world" 
shut  out  the  idea  of  supernatural  interference  in  educating  man. 
Eationalism  in  this  form,  and  what  is  called  communism,  are  often 
associated,  though  they  are  by  no  means  to  be  identified  or  con- 
founded. Its  politics  rise  out  of  its  philosophy.  The  great 
lesson  of  its  philosophy  is,  external  circumstances  are  the  agents 
of  fate,  look  well  to  them.  Its  polities  may  be  summed  up  in 
ascribing  demoralization  and  crime  to  the  factitious  arrangements 
of  society.  It  cries  out,  alter  these,  place  society  in  a  favourable 
position,  educate  man  aright,  and  then  will  be  realised  the  new 
heavens  and  the  new  earth,  wherein  dwclleth  righteousness. 

Viewed  merely  as  a  system  of  philosophy,  it  is  the  shallowest 
that  rationalism  ever  offered  to  the  world.  No  one  denies  the 
vast  influence  of  external  circumstances  upon  the  human  charac- 
ter, and  the  importance  of  attending  to  them.  It  will  also  be 
admitted  that  improved  systems  of  education,  and  altered  arrange- 
ments in  civil  society,  would  tend  greatly  to  lessen  crime,  and 
ameliorate  the  condition  of  man.  But  to  rest  the  world's  regene- 
ration on  these  alone,  exposes  the  system  to  the  charge  of  being 
one-sided  and  empirical,  as  unphilosophical  as  it  is  ungodly.  It 
takes  up  one  idea,  an  important  and  a  true  one,  but,  to  the  neglect 
of  other  ideas  no  less  true  and  important,  this  is  exalted,  carried 
everywhere  forth,  and  all  men  and  things  are  called  to  fall  down 


OF    THE    DIVINE    PKOVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  (57 

and  worship  it.  Material  circumstances  are  something,  but  the 
school  of  Owen  makes  them  everything.  The  human  will  is  no 
doubt  influenced  by  them,  but  our  rationalists  maintain,  in  oppo- 
sition to  consciousness,  that  it  is  controlled  by  them.  Man  is 
made  a  passive  creature.  This  is  plainly  implied  in  the  fond 
analogy  of  the  sun  acting  upon  the  earth.  Emerson  has  said,* 
"  man  is  here,  not  to  work,  but  to  be  worked  upon."  And  the 
men  of  this  school  tell  us  that  our  characters  ai'e  the  necessary 
result  of  our  organisation  at  birth,  and  subsequent  external  in- 
fluences over  wliich  we  have  no  control.  "  The  germs  of  intelli- 
gence and  virtue  are  expanded  or  blasted  by  them,"  and  thus  the 
whole  human  character  is  foi-med.  It  is  not  so.  Our  subjective 
constitution  is  not  sucli  an  inert,  helpless  thing.  We  are  conscious 
of  possessing  a  faculty  which  gives  us  control  over  external  cii- 
cumstanees;  so  that,  taking  this  into  account,  it  is  true  that 
character  is  the  result  of  our  subjective  nature,  and  of  the  objective 
influences  acting  upon  it.  But,  in  this  system  of  naturalism,^  the 
gi-eat  facts  of  man's  moral  natui-e  are  ignored.  One  portion  of  the 
field  of  phenomena  is  dwelt  upon  as  if  it  were  the  whole,  and  the 
other  portion,  which  to  a  reflective  mind  is  no  less  obvious,  is 
overlooked.  'Jlie  eye  is  turned  outward  and  lost  in  material 
tilings.  It  does  not  direct  its  glance  down  into  the  depths  of 
liuman  consciousness,  and  fails  to  perceive  the  more  wondrous 
things  of  the  spirit.  A  sense  of  responsibility,  and  moral  senti- 
ment, are  great  truths  in  the  natural  history  of  man.  They  are 
phenomena  just  as  palpable  to  the  eye  that  looks  inward,  as  any 
of  the  material  circumstances  ai-e  to  the  eye  that  looks  outwai'd. 
But  the  Owen  school  either  loses  sight  of  these  phenomena  in 
human  nature,  or  would  assign  them  to  a  blind  necessity,  a  source 
from  which  the  unsophisticated  mind  refuses  to  receive  them. 
Then  there  is  the  stubborn,  though  mysterious  fact  of  human 
depravity,  which  it  either  winks  at  or  entirely  overlooks,  and  for 
counteracting  which  it  accordingly  makes  no  provision.  The 
wonder  is  how  the  abettors  of  such  a  system  can  read  history,  or 
look  upon  the  v/orld  ai'ound  them,  without  perceiving,  on  the  one 
hand,  how  individuals  and  communities,  placed  amid  the  most 
favourable  external  circumstances,  have  continued  corrupt  and 
corrupters  ;  and  how,  on  the  other  hand,  persons  more  unfavour- 
ably situated  have,  notwithstanding,  become  exemplai'S  of  virtue. 
A  theory  that  ascribes  so  much  to  the  mere  outward  relations,  and 
leaves  no  room  for  an  influence  counteractive  of  bad  ones  or  efli- 
cacious  to  good  ones,  is  condemned  by  experience  as  well  as  by 
religion.  But  perhaps  its  advocates  would  reinove  it  from  such  a 
tribunal,  by  affirming  that  no  community  has  ever  yet  been  placed 
in  such  a  paradisaical  state  as  rationalism  would  place  it.     In 

*  Representative  Men,  p.  92,  Boliu's  edition. 

F   2 


C?  naturalism;  or,  the  denial 

sucli  a  case,  it  must  bear  tlie  double  stigma  of  being  godless  and 
Utopian. 

Hitherto  we  have  viewed  naturalism  as  broadly  manifested  in 
some  works  on  physical  and  moral  science,  and  now  we  have  to 
notice  its  appearance  in  the  department  of  Bible  theology. 
Germany,  in  this  respect,  though  not  exclusively  its  seat,  has 
attained  a  bad  pre-eminence.  Thousands  of  men,  professing  to 
be  Christ's  ministers  and  expounders  of  his  word,  have,  during 
the  last  half  century  or  more,  propounded  from  the  halls  and  pul- 
pits of  Germany  a  creed  which  no  more  admits  of  supernatural 
influence  than  any  of  the  philosophical  sj'stems  to  which  we  have 
adverted.  In  their  teaching,  God  is  as  effectually  excluded  from 
the  province  of  the  Bible,  as  in  the  "  Vestiges"  and  similar  works 
He  is  excluded  from  the  solar  system.  The  brilliant  and  bene- 
ficent miracles  which  ushered  in  the  Gospel  dispensation,  are 
exploded,  or  explained  away  on  purely  natural  principles.  And 
what  is  properly  meant  by  Divine  influence  is  denied  a  place 
either  in  the  mode  of  inspiring  the  sacred  writers,  or  in  the  mode 
of  enlightening  and  renewing  the  minds  of  the  readers.  Spinoza, 
whose  philosophy  has  exerted  such  a  mighty  influence  on  the 
thinking  of  Germany,  had  said,  "  all  that  is  recorded  in  the  books 
of  revelation,  took  place  in  conformity  with  the  established  lavrs 
of  the  universe."  On  this  principle,  interpretation  after  interpreta- 
tion has  been  given,  until  the  sacred  record  has  been  swe2Jt  as 
clear  of  its  mighty  signs  and  wonders,  as  some  would  sweep  the 
starry  firmament  of  the  evidences  of  an  ever-present  and  all-con- 
trolliug  God.  In  Germany,  speculative  philosophy  and  theological 
doctrine  are  more  closely  linked  together  than  in  any  other  country 
in  Europe.  The  pervading  principle  of  its  speculative  philosophy, 
that  God  never  intervenes  specially,  but  that  all  things  move  on 
in  a  chain  of  necessaiy  development,  has  been  carried  into  the 
region  of  its  theology.  Hence  the  axiom,  laid  down  at  the 
threshold,  "  mnacles  are  an  impossibility."  The  very  first  prin- 
ciple which  Strauss  brings  to  the  study  of  the  evangelists  is,  that 
when  the  events  narrated  are  incompatible  with  known  and 
universal  laws,  it  must  be  maintained  that  they  did  not  happen 
in  the  manner  recorded.  Divine  Providence  is  thus  interdicted 
at  the  onset. 

We  have  been  accustomed  to  consider  Christianity  as  a  second 
creation,  and  to  conceive  that  as  the  first  creation  took  place  by 
a  special  intervention  of  Divine  Power,  so  did  the  second.  The 
philosophy  of  tlie  rationalist  will  not  admit  this,  and  therefore 
his  theology  must  be  shaped  so  as  to  exclude  it.  The  first 
miracle  in"  Christianity  is  the  birth  and  manifestation  of  the. 
Saviour.  This  cannot  be  a  true  literal  history,  says  the  rationalist, 
for  it  is  incompatible  v.'ith  tlic  laws  that  regulate  the  succession  of 
events.      The   m.iraculons   texture  of  the   gospel   narrative  may 


OF   T]IE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  C' 

lie  admitted,  "but  the  wonders  recorded  must  be  accounted  for 
in  accordance  with  the  assumed  ' principle  that  there  is  no 
supernatural  intervention  in  the  world's  history.  Hence  tlie 
theory,  formerly  adverted  to,*  that  Christ  did  not  make  t'le 
church,  but  the  church  made  Him.  He  is  represented  as  a  pious 
Israelite,  educated  in  the  bosom  of  a  pious  family  in  Nazareth, 
who  endeavoured  to  realise  in  Himself  the  Messianic  conceptions 
that  prevailed  among  the  people.  He  believed  Himself  to  be  the 
Messiah  of  promise;  the  Jews,  in  process  of  time,  transferred 
their  conceptions  to  Him,  and  recognised  Him  as  the  expected 
deliverer.  Thus,  out  of  the  existing  Messianic  notions,  and  the 
impression  which  Jesus  made  by  his  personal  qualities  anc!. 
actions,  does  rationalism  derive  the  first  miracle  of  Christianity — 
the  birtli,  incarnation,  and  appearing  of  the  Son  of  God.  The 
great  mystery  of  godliness  having  been  thus  -stripped  of  its 
grandeur,  and  mpde  to  assume  the  shape  of  a  natural  event,  the 
whole  train  of  mighty  worlrs  wrought  by  Christ  and  his  apostles 
must  undergo  a  similar  denuding  process.  Eationalism  admits 
that,  according  to  the  conceptions  then  prevalent  sjnong  the 
Jews,  the  Messiah  was  to  be  a  worker  of  miracles;  and  it  infers 
that,  in  consequence  of  these  concejotions,  they  ascribed  to  Him 
the  power  of  performing  them.  "  The  chain  of  endless  causation," 
says  Strauss,  "  can  never  be  broken,  and  a  miracle  is  an  im- 
possibility."—  They  must  be  resolved,  therefore,  into  purely 
natural  principles.! 

The  earlier  school  of  rationalists,  which  took  hold  of  Spinoza's 
principle,  endeavoured  to  show  that  the  gospels  were  not  miracu- 
lous in  their  texture,  that  the  writers  never  intended  to  assert 
miracle,  and  that  the  events  recorded  were  simple  facts  magnified 
by  the  impression  which  they  made  on  the  senses,  or  exaggerated 
by  the  false  colouring  of  copyists  and  others.  This  school  of  ra- 
tionalism has  well-nigh  become  obsolete.  It  was  too  materialistic 
for  the  ideal  tendencies  of  Germany.  Strauss  assailed  it.  He  de- 
clai-es  in  that  misnomer,  the  "  Leben  Jesu,"  "that  it  was  time  to 
substitute  a  new  method  of  considering  the  history  of  Jesus  for 
the  worn-out  idea  of  a  supernatural  intervention,  and  a  naturalist 
explanation."  He  is,  however,  but  a  naturalist  in  another  shape. 
He  admits  the  gospels  to  be  miraculous  narratives.  And  in  this 
admission  there  is  assuredly  no  more  virtue  than  in  the  recogni- 
tion, on  a  clear  frosty  night,  of  the  stars  that  shine  out  of  the 
depths  of  the  blue  sky.  Miracles,  as  Dr.  Newinan  has  well  said.]; 
"  form  the  substance  and  groundwork  of  the  narrative,  and,  liks 

*  Chapter  II.  p.  53. 

+  It  may  be  here  noticed  that  the  "  Progress  of  the  Intellect"  goes  on  the  pan 
theistic  assumption  that  a  miracle  is  God  at  variance  with  Himself;  and,  then 
taking  a  leaf  out  of  Strauss,  accounts  for  the  development  of  a  supematurr 
Messiah.     See  vol.  i.  p.  20,  and  vol.  ii.  chap.  8. 

t  Newman's  Dissertation  on  Miracles,  Encyclop.  Metrop. 


70  NATURALISM  ;    OK.,    THE    I)E^'IAL 

the  figure  of  Phidias  on  Minerva's  shield,  cannot  be  erased  without 
S]toiling  the  entire  composition."  But,  while  admitting  the  gos- 
pels to  he  supernatural  in  their  texture,  or  to  have  miracles  inter- 
woven with  them,  he  aims  to  show  that  they  nevertheless  originated 
without  an  historical  foundation  ;  as  if  the  stars  of  night  were 
mere  mental  iUusions,  and  the  form  of  Phidias  on  the  shield 
A  fiction  not  a  reality.  His  fundamental  position  is  a  naturalist 
one :  "  miracles  are  not  and  never  were."  Every  narrative  that 
surpasses  the  ordinary  course  of  events  proves  itself  not  to  be  his- 
torically true.  The  allegory,  the  legend,  the  myth,  must  explain 
all  the  bright  and  beneficent  miracles  that  astonished  the  Jews 
before  whom  they  were  wrought,  and  that  have  drawn  forth  the 
homage  of  the  church  in  every  age.  The  naturalism  of  Strauss, 
and  his  followers  may  differ  in  some  features  from  that  of  Paulus 
and  the  older  rationalists,  but  it  is  sheer  naturalism  still. =i= 

Is  the  feeding  of  five  thousand  men  with  five  loaves  and  two 
small  fishes  to  be  accounted  for  ?  This  has  generally  been  re- 
garded as  one  of  the  most  striking  manifestations  of  the  divine  power 
of  Christ,  and  so  great  was  the  impression  produced  on  the  multi- 
tudes who  witnessed  it,  that  they  cried,  "  This  Is  of  a  truth  that 
Prophet  that  should  come  into  the  world."  But,  according  to  our 
rationalist,  this  great  miracle  dwindles  down  to  the  event  of  Christ 
having  had  such  an  influence  over  the  minds  of  men,  as  that  the 
more  wealthy  in  the  crowd  who  were  well  supplied  with  provisions, 
v/ere  constrained  to  distribute  of  their  abundance  to  the  destitute 
multitudes ;  or  it  may  be  regarded  as  a  copy  of  the  story  of  the 
manna  in  the  desert.  The  calming  of  the  storm  on  the  sea  of 
Galilee,  is  another  of  those  miglity  works  that  have  strikingly  dis- 
played the  supernatural  power  of  the  Saviour.  It  led  the  observers 
in  wonder  and  awe  to  exclaim,  "  What  manner  of  man  is  this,  that 
even  the  winds  and  the  sea  obey  him !"  Rationalism,  however, 
has  the  explanation  at  hand.  Jesus,  by  his  calm  and  dignified 
demeanour,  tranquillised  the  troubled  minds  of  his  disciples.  By 
a  happy  coincidence,  the  raging  elements  of  nature  at  the  same 
time  became  still.  And  the  event  was  thus  magnified  into  the  mira- 
culous. In  short,  is  it  the  most  magnificent  of  all  miracles,  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  that  is  to  be  accounted  for?  The  rationalist 
acknowledges  that  the  surprising  revolution  in  tlie  minds  of  the 
disciples  from  the  deep  despair  into  which  tbey  had  sunk  at  the 
death  of  Jesus,  to  the  fearless  energy  with  which  they  shortly  after- 
wards pleaded  His  cause,  shows  that  during  the  interval  something 
extraordinary  had  happened.  What  that  something  was,  the 
gospel  narratives  tell  us:  —  the  miraculous  resurrection  of  Christ. 
wliich  powerfully  declared  Him  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  But  naturalism 
admits  no  miracle.     Strauss  says,  the  roeurn  of  a  dead  person  to 

*  See  Dr.  Beard's  Voices  of  tlie  Church,  p.  3.3, 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    G0VERN5IENT.  71 

life  is  impossible.  And  the  change  which  took  place  in  the  minds 
of  the  disciples  is  resolved  into  visions,  and  these  visions  are  re- 
solved into  their  own  excited  feelings.  The  most  stupendous 
events  in  the  world's  history  are  thus  made  to  vanish  before  a 
naturalist  explanation.*  And  Strauss  coolly  and  remorselessly 
looks  on,  as  the  bright  train  of  beneficent  and  mighty  deeds,  which 
have  drawn  forth  Jiien's  faith  and  reverence,  disappear.  No  won- 
der that  the  German  mind,  on  reflecting,  drew  back  from,  or  re- 
fused assent  to  such  critical  principles  as  these,  inasmuch  as  they 
viere  seen  to  uproot  all  our  hold  upon  the  past,  and  to  involve  all 
history  in  a  mythical  illusion. 

Pantheism  and  naturalism  may  be  said  to  meet  in  this  theory, 
which  we  denounce  as  one  of  the  most  imphilosophical  that  was 
ever  attempted  to  be  imposed  upon  the  world.  Its  dogged 
adherence,  in  spite  of  all  evidence,  to  the  position  that  miracles 
are  impossible,  is  consistent  only  with  absolute  atheism  or 
pantheism.  Men  who  adopt,  as  a  fundamental  principle,  the 
impossibility  of  supernatural  intervention,  must  either  deny  that 
Ood  is,  or  deprive  Him  of  his  personality.  Strauss,  as  we  have 
already  noticed,  is  a  pantheist  in  the  extreme.  He  stands  at  that 
point  where  atheism  and  pantheism  face  each  other,  and  shake 
hands.  And  just  as  one  impiety  naturally  follows  another,  does 
his  theory  of  Christianity  arise  out  of  his  other  infidel  views.  But 
admit  the  existence  of  a  first  Intelligent  Cause,  the  Creator  of 
heaven  and  earth,  the  living  God,  —  a  necessary  truth  granted  by 
all  sound  reasoners  —  and  where  is  the  rationality  in  denying  that 
He  either  does  or  can  interpose  in  the  system  of  tilings  which  He 
has  established  ?  Reasoning  a  jiriori,  and  in  accordance  with  a 
pure  theism,  we  would  have  been  led  to  conclude  that  He  who 
made  the  worlds  would  continue  to  govern  them,  and  that,  for 
gi-eat  and  special  ends,  He  would  intei^iose  in  a  special  and 
extraordinaiy  manner.  Whether  He  has  done  so  or  not  must  bo 
decided  on  the  broad  ground  of  evidence.  The  axiom  of  Strauss 
contravenes  the  very  jfoundatiou  principles  of  the  inductive  plii- 
losophy.  A  miracle  is  neither  impossible  nor  incredible,  on  the 
supposition  of  a  God. 

Miracles  are  supernatural  facts,  things  which  bespeak  the 
inteiwention  of  a  cause  superior  to  and  having  a  supreme  control 
over  all  natural  causes.  It  matters  not,  in  our  present  argument, 
whether  we  strictly  define  them  as  lying  beyond  the  sphere  of 
natural  laws,  or  as  invoh^ng  the  idea  of  suspension  of  or  opposition 
to  these  laws.  In  either  case  we  demand  the  interposition  of  God. 
To  raise  a  dead  man  to  life,  or  to  walk  upon  the  sea,  may  be 
viewed  either  as  above  the  range  of  the  established  laws  of  nature, 
or  as  directly  contrary  to  them;  but,  on  either  suj)position,  the 

*  See  Tholuck,  in  Dr.  Beard,  p.  ]5l. 


72  naturalism;  oe,  the  denial 

operation  is  divine.  Tlie  latter  point  of  view  is  commonly,  tliougli 
not  uniyersally,  taken  by  evangelical  men  in  our  country ;  the 
former  is  the  stand-point  of  distinguished  Christian  divines  on  the 
Continent.  Strauss  and  his  school  lay  down  the  position  that 
nature  is  but  a  development  of  God.  He  says  the  chain  of  endless 
causation  cannot  be  broken;  and  taking  the  common  idea  of 
miracles,  as  violations  or  suspensions  of  natural  laws,  he  declai-es 
a  miracle  to  be  impossible.  Neander,  Mliller,  D'Aubigne,  and 
other  Continental  divines,  without  conceding  anything  to  the 
rationalists,  oppose  them,  by  maintaining  that  miraculous 
phenomena  lie  beyond  the  sphere  of  those  laws,  and  are  not 
violations  of  them.  And  in  this  theory  they  are  joined  by  some 
of  our  own  eminent  evangelical  writers,  such  as  Trench,  Vaughan, 
Westcott,  and  the  author  of  "The  Kestoration  of  Belief "-■:<  The 
idea  of  supernatural  intervention  is  prominent,  however,  in  either 
view,  and  that  is  not  to  be  tolerated  by  naturalism.  Miracles  may 
be  perfectly  natural,  viewed  in  reference  to  a  higher  w^orld, 
but  they  are  supernatural  viewed  in  reference  to  this.  "  At  the 
establisinnent  of  Christianity,"  says  D'Aubigne,  "  the  superior 
world  acted  upon  the  inferior  world,  conformably  to  the  laws  which 
are  peculiar  to  it;  a  miracle  is  nothing  more  than  this."f  Be  the 
mii-acle  contrary  to,  or  lying  beyond,  the  subordinate  laws  of 
physical  nature,  it  is  doubtless  in  conformity  with  tlie  moral  and 
supreme  law  of  the  universe.  "  God,  therefore,"  says  Gioberti, 
"far  from  disturbing  universal  harmony,  maintains  it,  by  in- 
terrupting the  course  of  physical  forces  in  certain  determinate 
cases,  and  for  a  most  wise  end."| 

Hume  and  the  older  deists  said,  a  miracle  is  incredible. 
Strauss  and  the  modern  rationalists,  affirm  a  miracle  to  be  im- 
possible. Hume's  fallacy,  as  has  often  been  shown,  lay  in  con- 
founding two  distinct  experiences,  the  miiform  experience  of  the 
individual,  and  the  uniform  experience  of  mankind  viewed  as  a 
whole.     He  reasoned  as  if  his  own  experience  embraced  a  knov/- 

*  Page  23.>.         _  +  The  Miracles  ;  or,  Two  Errors. 

*  Dr.  Wardla\v,  in  his  recent  able  work  "  On  Miracles,"  advocates  what  may  be 
callejl  the  old  \iew,  and  offers  some  strictures  on  Drs.  Vaughan  and  Beard,  and 
Mr.  Trench,  who  contend  that  miracles  are  not  "contra  naturam,  but  prcstcr 
naturam,  and  supra  naturam."  And  yet  he  says  of  the  miraculous  event,  "  it  does 
not  to  me  seem  vei-y  material,  whether  we  speak  of  it  as  beyond  nature,  or  above 
nature,  or  beside  nature,  or  against  nature,  or  conti-ary  to  natui-e, — whether  as  a 
suspension,  an  inteiTuption,  a  contravention,  or  a  violation  of  nature's  laws; 
—  provided  we  are  understanding  'nature  and  nature's  laws'  as  having  reference 
to  the  physical  economy  of  our  own  system."  — (P.  31.)  This,  we  presume,  is  just 
thair  understanding  when,  according  to  Mr,  Westcott,  they  say,  "  that  there  is 
nothing  in  miracles  contrary  to  nature,  while  all  is  above  nature  ;  —  that  the  laws 
of  existences  around  us  are  not  broken,  but  resolved  into  higher  laws." — Gospel 
Harmony,  p.  17.  V/e  are  disposed  to  regard  this  discussion  as  not  "  much  more 
than  a  logomachy,"  for  the  great  idea  of  supernatural  intervention  is  unaffected 
by  it.  At  the  same  time,  the  "  above  and  beyond  nature"  view  seems  the  more 
advantageous  one  in  cutting  away  the  ground  from  beneath  the  German  anti- 
iniracle  school. 


OF    THE    DIVINE    PItOVlDENTIAL    GOVEIINMENT.  73 

ledge  of  all  causes,  and  as  if  his  kuowledgo  of  the  power  of  all 
causes  was  so  complete  that  he  was  wairanted  to  say,  there  is  not 
a  cause  able  or  willing  to  work  miracles.  His  own  uniform  ex- 
perience, as  an  individual,  bore  testimony  to  the  constancy  of  the 
laws  of  nature.  And  the  fallacy  consisted  in  exulting  tliat  ex- 
perience into  the  experience  of  the  human  race.  In  short,  the 
argument  is  based  upon  a  gross  assumption.  By  it  he  arro^-ates 
to  himself  a  knowledge  which  no  finite  intelligence  can  possess. 
The  argument  fails  also  in  the  principle  on  which  it  vfould  set 
aside  the  testimony  of  witnesses  adduced   to   prove   a   miracle. 

Hume  reasons  thus:  there  are  two  testimonies  in  the  case the 

testimony  of  uniform  experience  in  affirming  tlie  constancy  of  the 
laws  of  nature,  and  the  testimony  of  witnesses  in  favour  of  a 
miracle  or  deviation  from  these  ordinary  laws.     No  number  of 
witnesses  for  the  miracle  can  equal  the  evidence  for  the  constancy 
of  nature.     It  is  more  probable  that  the  witnesses  should  have 
been  deceived,  however  apparently  strong  their  testimony,  than 
that  the  laws  of  nature  should  have  been  departed  from.     Thus, 
all  miracles  are  denied,  v/ithout  any  regard  to  the  kind  or  quality 
of  proof  by  which  they  are  supported.     The  rationalist  entrenches 
liimself  behind  the  position  of  the  incredibility  or  impossibility  of 
-   miracles,  and  levels  to  the  ground  the  whole  structure  of  Chris- 
tianity.    Now,  it  is  sufficient  to  say  to  this,  tliat,  in  the  ordinary 
concerns  of  life,  we  value  testimony  rather  for  its  quality  tlian  for 
its  quantity.     If  a  few  witnesses  of  known  veracity  attest  an  e;> 
traordinary  occurrence,  we  confide  in  their  testimony  as  naturally 
as  we  do  in  the  testimony  of  thousands  of  persons  who  had  pre- 
viously deposed  to  the  ordinary  course  of  events.     On  the  veiy 
same  principle,  then,  we  should,  as  has  been  satisfactorily  argued, 
credit  testimony  unexceptionable  in  its  quality  when  it  is  adduced 
not  only  in  proof  of  the  extraordinary,  but  when  it  carries  us  a 
step  higher — to  the  supernatiu-al  or  miraculous.     Well-attested 
miracles  can  consistently  be  denied  only  on  atheistical,  or,  what 
in  this  case  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  pantheistical  principles. 
Once  admit  the  existence  of  a  Personal  God,  Himself  uncaused 
and  the  cause  of  all,  and  you  cannot  rationally  deny  that  He  may 
interpose   in   the   concerns   of  the   universe.      Grant    that    the 
Almighty  intervened  in  calUng  into  existence  the  first  creation, 
and  you  cannot  reasonably  withliold  your  assent,  that,  if  evidence 
in  support  of  it  exist.  He  may  have  intervened  in  originating 
Christianity,  the  second  creation.     The  rationalist  who,  in. the 
face  of  all  evidence,  takes  up  the  position  that  miracles  are  im- 
possible, must  be  driven  back  to  another  position,  viz.  the  non- 
existence of  a   Being   who    can    perform    supernatural    works. 
Strauss,  in  maintaining  the  impossibility  of  miracles,  as  vrell  as 
Hume  in  asserting  their  incredibility,  has  been  flagi-antly  guilty 
of  a  p.jtitio  2'rincijjii  —  a  begging  of  the  question.     It  is  nothing 


7-1  NATURALISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

more  than  his  ipse  dixit.  The  world  has  had  more  than  enough 
of  this  philosophy,  falsely  so  called,  which  would  supersede  all 
investigation  into  the  testimony  for  miracles  by  proclaiming  it  as 
an  axiom  that  miracles  are  impossible,  or  that  no  evidence  can 
substantiate  them.  It  is  alike  opposed  to  the  cautious  philosophy 
of  Bacon,  and  to  the  facts  and  principles  of  Holy  Scripture.  It 
is  the  taking  of  a  one-sided,  and  consequently  a  very  erroneous 
view  of  God's  universe.  The  moral  system  is  ignored,  a  system 
as  real  and  palpable  as  the  ])hysical,  though  immeasurably 
superior  to  it.  And  the  remark  is  as  applicable  to  the  men  of  the 
Strauss  school  as  to  the  men  of  the  Hume  school :  their  antece- 
dent objections  against  miracles  "  will  be  found  nearly  all  to  arise 
from  forgetfulness  of  the  existence  of  moral  laws.  In  their  zeal 
to  perfect  the  laws  of  matter,  they  most  unphilosophically  over- 
look a  more  sublime  system,  which  contains  disclosures  not  only 
of  the  Being  but  of  the  Will  of  God."':=. 

But  Scripture  itself,  imder  this  system  of  naturalism,  is,  as  a 
whole,  disrobed  of  its  glory.  The  special  interposition  of  God  in 
inspiring  the  sacred  writers,  is  as  much  excluded  as  his  interpo^ 
sition  in  working  the  Bible  miracles.  And,  if  the  mighty  deeds 
recorded  sink  down  to  the  level  of  common  events,  why  should  not 
the  Holy  Book  itself  descend  to  the  level  of  a  common  treatise  ? 
John  Foster  has  said  :  "  Surely  it  is  fair  to  believe  that  those  who 
received  from  heaven  superhuman  power,  received  likewise  super- 
human wisdom.  Having  rung  the  great  bell  of  the  universe,  the 
sermon  to  follow  must  be  extraordinary."  Naturalism,  having 
denied  the  superhuman  power,  consistently  with  its  own  principles, 
denies  the  superhuman  wisdom.  The  bell,  according  to  it,  was 
nothing  uncommon,  and  the  sermon  that  followed  was  nothing 
transcendent.  The  denial  of  the  miracles  has,  in  fact,  led  to  the 
denial  of  the  inspiration.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the  Bible 
records  miracles.  It  must  be  admitted  also  that  the  Bible  claims 
special  inspiration.  Naturalism  cannot  admit  the  miracles,  and 
consequently  it  cannot  concede  that  the  prophets  and  apostles, 
holy  men  of  God,  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
De'^Wette  and  others  attacked  the  Old  Testament,  and  Strauss  has 
made  a  similar  onslaught  on  the  New,  from  the  same  naturalist 
position.  The  books  must  be  treated  as  spurious  because  they 
narrate  predictions  and  miracles,  things  which  naturalism  cannot 
away  with.  We  find,  accordingly,  in  the  writings  of  the  old 
English  deists,  in  the  AVolfenblittel  Fragments,  and  in  a  succes- 
sion of  such  like  productions  down  to  that  paragon  of  honest 
book-writing — "Phases  of  Faith,"  aheap  of  apparent  contradic- 
tions raked  together  from  all  quarters,  the  fruit  of  a  shallow 
criticism   and  an  irreligious  spirit,  in  order  to  falsify  the  Book 

*  Newman's  Dissertation,  Encyclop.  Metrop. 


OF    THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    CiOVEnNMENT.  75 

which  claims  to  have  been  given  by  insinratiou  of  God.  Hatred 
of  the  supernatural,  which  is  interwoven  with  every  page  of  Scrip- 
ture, has  led  to  the  various  disingenuous  attempts  to  depreciate 
the  testimony  of  the  inspired  writers.  It  is  related  that  a  Swedish 
traveller,  in  looking  through  the  library  of  Voltaire,  found  Calmet's 
Commentary  with  slips  of  paper  inserted,  on  which  were  written 
the  difhculties  noticed  by  Calmet,  without  the  slighest  reference 
to  the  solutions  given  by  the  commentator.  The  Swede,  who,  in 
other  respects,  admired  the  brilliant  Frenchman,  denounced  this 
conduct  as  dishonourable.  And  yet,  as  Hengstenberg  remarks,-:- 
our  modern  rationalist  critics  have  acted  in  a  similar  manner. 
Theodore  Parker,  Francis  William  Newman,  and  Eobert  William 
Mackay.f  who  make  no  secret  of  the  Gamaliels  at  whose  feet  they 
have  been  sitting,  serve  up  the  often-refuted  objections  against 
the  infallibility  of  the  sacred  writers,  as  if  they  were  a  fresh  course, 
and  then,  on  the  assumption  of  their  gross  mistakes  and  contra- 
dictions, conclude  against  their  miraculous  inspiration. 

The  age  in  which  we  live  is  universal  in  its  tendencies.  It 
must  have  all  thmgs  in  common.  The  mind  lias  become  into- 
lerant of  monopolies.  And  not  a  few  writers  in  our  own  and  other 
lands  ai-e  labouring  to  bring  the  Bible  down  from  its  proud  pre- 
eiJiinence,  stripping  it  of  its  solitary  grandeur,  and  allowing  it  no 
other  inspiration  than  that  which  is  common  to  men.  The  con- 
troversy may  be  said  to  have  shifted  its  ground,  or  to  present  a 
new  phasis,  in  consequence  of  a  new  philosophic  influence.  For- 
merly, our  Christian  apologists  had  to  contend  for  the  very  element 
of  inspiration  in  the  sacred  books,  as  they  had  to  contend  for  the 
miraculous  texture  of  the  Gospel  narratives;  now,  we  have  to 
strive  for  their  special  claim  to  the  Divine  inbreathing,  against 
those  who  would  merge  them  in  an  influence  common  as  the 
light  or  air  of  heaven.  Thus  Mr.  Farker,!  speaking  after  the 
Emerson  fashion,  tells  us,  "inspiration,  like  God's  omnipresence, 
is  not  limited  to  the  few  writers  claimed  by  the  Jews,  Christians, 
or  Mahometans,  but  it  is  co-extensive  with  the  race."  Minos  and 
Moses,  David  and  Pindar,  Leibnitz  and  Paul,  Newton  and  Simon 
Peter,  "  receive  into  then-  various  forms  the  one  spirit  from  God 
most  high."  Yea,  "  this  inspiration  is  limited  to  no  sect,  age,  or 
nation.  It  is  wide  as  the  world,  and  common  as  God."  The 
Bible  thus  ceases  to  be  the  law  and  the  testimony,  the  only  in- 
fallible directory  of  faith  and  morals,  and  men  may  turn  it  into 
myths  and  legends,  receive  or  reject  it,  as  they  please.  But  this 
attempt  to  confound  inspiration  and  omnipresence  goes  on  the 
assumption  that   as   God  is  present  everywhere,  He  cannot  be 

*  Hengstenberg  on  the  Pentateuch,  vol.  i.  p.  47. 

+  See  Parkers  Discourses,  Newmans  Phases  of  Faith,  and  Mackay's  Progress  of 
the  Intellect,  passim. 

i  Paiker's  Discourse,  pp.  161 — 171. 


ib  NATUEALISM  ;    OK,    THE    DENIAL 

Specially  present  auyv^-llere ;  that  as  he  may  be  said  to  exert  a  com- 
mon influence  on  the  minds  of  all  men,  He  cannot  be  said  to  exert  a 
supernatm-al  influence  on  the  minds  of  a  chosen  number  of  men. 
An  assumption  of  the  same  nature  and  philosophic  value  as  tliat 
of  Sti'auss — miracles  are  impossible. 

The  Bible  comes  to  us  claiming  to  have  been  given  by 
miraculous  inspiration  of  God — an  inspiration  separated  by  an 
impassable  gulf  from  that  of  mere  genius — and,  in  support  of  its 
claims,  presents  a  large  atnount  of  clear  and  strong  evidence. 
There  is  an  impregnable  external  testimony  encircling  it  "  as  the 
mountains  are  round  about  Jerusalem,"  and,  on  its  pages,  the 
finger  of  God  is  not  less  clearly  manifested  than  on  the  stariy 
heavens.  This  Book  stands  above  and  apart  from  the  sublimest 
efi'usious  of  human  genius,  revealing  truths  bearing  on  man's 
liighest  interests  and  lying  beyond  the  sphere  where  science  and 
genius  make  their  discoveries  —  having  a  history  quite  un- 
paralleled and  miraculous — and  producing  on  individuals  and 
commimities  such  radical  and  beneficent  changes  of  heart  and 
life,  as  no  other  book  in  the  world  has  effected.  It  professes  to 
have  received  its  grand  revelations  directly  from  above,  and  to  have 
transmitted  them  under  such  infallible  guidance  as  entitles  it 
to  be  regarded  as  the  oracle  of  God.  We  meddle  not  with  the 
question  of  degrees  of  inspiration.  We  advocate  no  theory  of 
mechanical  dictation.  It  is  enough,  but  not  more  than  enough, 
that  vre  hold  a  special  influence  ranging  from  the  highest  point,  or 
dii-ect  revelation,  down  to  the  lowest  limit,  or  superintendence  as 
a  guard  against  erroi-.  We  take  the  fact  as  it  stands — all  Scrip- 
ture is  given  by  inspiration  of  God.  The  mode  does  not  trouble 
us,  Sciipture,  in  its  rich  diversity  of  style,  evinces  free  mental 
action  on  the  part  of  the  sacred  writers,  while  it  asserts  that  action 
to  have  been  under  the  infallible  guidance  of  the  Divine  Spirit. 
The  plenary  inspiration,  wc  hold  in  perfect  consistency  with  the 
human  peculiarities.  Our  position  "  presupposes  tliat  the  san}e 
providential  power  which  gave  the  message  selected  tlie  messenger, 
and  implies  that  the  traits  of  individual  character  and  the  peculiar- 
ities of  manner  and  purpose,  which  are  displayed  in  the  compo- 
sition and  language  of  the  sacred  writings,  are  essentia]  to  the 
perfect  exhibition  of  their  meaning.  ,  .  .  It  preserves  absolute 
truthfulness  with  perfect  humanity,  so  that  the  nature  of  man  is 
not  neutralised,  if  we  may  thus  speak,  by  the  Divine  agency,  and 
the  truth  of  God  is  not  modified,  but  exactly  expressed  in  one  cf 
its  several  aspects,  by  the  individual  mind.  Each  element  per- 
forms its  perfect  work,  and  in  religion,  as  well  as  in  philosophy, 
we  find  a  glorious  reality  based  upon  a  true  antithesis."-:^  This 
is  the  Bible  claim.     And  if  this  be  not  conceded  on  the  ground 

*  Westcott's  Elemenis  of  the  Gospel  Ilaniiouy,  rp-  ",  10, 


OF    THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVEENMENT.  77 

of  the  internal  and  external  evidence,  then  the  Bible,  in  its  struc- 
ture, in  its  characteristic  truths,  in  the  simplicity  and  majesty  of 
its  style,  in  its  matchless  character  of  Christ,  in  its  influence  on 
and  present  position  in  the  world — is  a  greater  miracle  than  the 
miraculous  inspiration  wliicli  uatiu-alism  would  set  aside.  Dis- 
crepancies we  admit,  such  discrepancies  as  migiit  have  been  ex- 
pected to  result  from  the  transmission  of  a  hook  through  so  many 
hands,  languages,  and  ages,  unless  shielded  so  miraculously  at 
every  point  that  the  finger  of  no  copyist  could  inadvertently  have 
introduced  a  wrong  date  or  omitted  a  letter.  But  what  is  the 
chafi"  to  the  v.-lieat  ?  A  large  number  of  discrepancies,  on  which 
infidel  objections  were  grounded,  have  vanished  before  the  appli- 
cation of  a  true  and  searching  criticism,  and  we  anticipate  that 
the  residue  will  be  still  further  diminished  till  it  shall  be  accounted 
as  nothing.  There  is  no  discrepancy  in  regard  to  the  substantial 
contents  of  Christianity,  and  to  found  an  argument  against 
the  miraculous  inspiration  of  Scriptm-e  on  a  few  unresolved 
variances,  is  no  less  irrational  than  to  argue  against  the  perfec- 
tions of  God  because  of  some  conflicting  natural  phenomena.* 
The  Bible,  in  its  disclosures,  history,  and  position,  is  as  unac- 
countable without  the  admission  of  special  inspiration,  as  the 
world  and  the  fulness  thereof  without  the  creating  and  unholdin^r 
hand  of  God.f  ■" 

The  position  taken  up  by  Mr.  Morell  on  this  question,  however 
stoutly  he,  in  other  respects,  denounces  rationalism,  is  little  better 
than  a  rationalist  one.  He  indeed  admits  supernatural  agency, 
but  it  is  a  mere  vivifying  operation,  a  heightening  or  clearing  of 
the  power  of  intuition,  not  generically  different  from  the  ins^nra- 
tions  of  genius  or  the  spiritual  elevation  common  to  Christians. 
'I  Inspiration,"  according  to  him,  "depends  upon  the  clearness,' 
force,  and  accuracy  of  a  man's  religious  intuitions.^  ...  It 
does  not  involve  any  form  of  intelligence  essentially  diflerent  from 
whatwe  already  possess.§  .  .  .  It  is  a  higher  potency  of  a 
certain  form  of  consciousness,  whicli  every  man  to  some  deoree 
possesses."!!  Indeed,  if  his  theory  be  true,  inspiration  is  not  only 
a  much  less  extraordinary  thing  than  the  church  has  imagined, 
but  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  it  taking  place  again,  and  a  supple- 
ment being  made  to  the  volume  of  revelation.     Let  the  religious 

*  Butler's  AnaJogy,  p.  8.    (Dublin,  1849.) 

+  We  make  no  use  of  the  petitio  piincipii  in  tlie  above  remarks.  We  do  not 
say  to  our  opponents,  The  Scriptures  are  inspired,  and  therefore  their  statements 
must  be  true.  But  we  ground  an  argument  for  their  inspiration  on  their  internal 
structure  and  external  position.  The  author  of  "  The  Restoration  of  Belief 
observes,  "We  are  often  told  that  we  timidly  hold  up  this  'Inspiration'  as  a 
scn^en.  Jest  the  documents  of  our  faith  should  come  to  be  dealt  with  severely  in 
the  mode  that  is  proper  to  historic  criticism."  With  him  we  say,  "  Only  let  this 
Historic  Severity  take  its  free  course,  and  Disbelief  will  be  driven  from  its  last 
stnndmff-plnce.  .  .  .  It  would  wither  like  the  prass  of  the  tronics."—P  127 
f  .Morell's  Philosophy  of  Eehgion,  p.  176.  ?  Ibid.  p.  151.      "       |'  Ddd  p  106 


78  KATUnALlSM  ;    OR,    THE    DExNIAL 

consciousness  be  elevated,  the  moral  nature  purified,  and  the  power 
of  spiritual  vision  increased,  and,  as  he  asks,  what  do  we  require 
more  in  inspiration?  He  denies  that  any  special  Divine  com- 
mission to  wi-ite  was  given  to  the  sacred  penman,  "  that  each  Look 
came  forth  with  a  specific  impress  of  Deity  upon  it,"=i'» — or  that 
the  providence  of  God  watched  over  the  composition  and  con- 
struction of  the  Bible  in  any  other  sense  than  Providence  super- 
intends every  event  bearing  upon  the  w^elfare  of  man.f  The  in- 
spired word,  with  him,  is  just  a  transcript  of  the  religious 
consciousness  of  the  writers,  a  representation  of  "  the  bright  im- 
pressions of  apostolic  men,"  —  the  result  of  "the  Divine  light 
which  was  granted  to  the  age,  and  to  the  mmd  of  the  author — 
a  gift  which  ho  was  left  to  make  use  of  as  necessity  or  propriety 
might  suggest."!  He  thus  cuts  up  infallibility  by  the  root,  that 
error  which,  he  and  Mr.  Newman  hold,  has  been  introduced  into 
the  idea  of  inspiration.  And  then  he  thinks  that,  without  irrever- 
ence,S  he  can  speak  of  misstatements  made  by  the  Evangelists, 
and  of  false  reasoning  in  Paul  the  most  logical  of  the  apostles. 

It  is  the  strangest  part  of  this  unsatisfactory  theory,  that  inspi- 
ration cannot  apply  to  processes  of  reasoning,  that  "  it  can  neither 
give  any  certitude,  nor  guard  against  any  eiTors  which  an  accurate 
thinker  could  not  detect  for  himself." |1  He  confounds  logic  as  an 
instrument  with  the  understanding  that  employs  it  when  he  speaks 
of  inspired  logic  as  an  absurdity.  Let  us  suppose  a  reasoner  so 
accurate  that  he  errs  only  once  in  a  hundred  times.  That  one 
error,  however,  may  have  been  very  important.  What  impos- 
sibility is  there  in  the  supposition  of  a  supernatural  influence 
carrying  up  the  mind  from  general  to  universal  accuracy — as 
eflectually  excluding  ciTor  from  the  hundredth  process  as  it  had 
been  excluded  up  to  the  ninety-ninth  ?  God,  assuredly,  can  sug- 
gest a  train  of  reasoning  to  the  mind  of  an  individual,  and  control 
that  mind  so  as  to  lead  it  to  a  right  conclusion,  and  extend  that 
control  over  the  wiiter  so  as  to  enable  him  to  convey  to  others 
both  the  process  and  the  result  in  terms  free  from  error.  This,  we 
maintain,  has  been  done  in  the  case  of  Paul.  In  this  there  is  no 
absurdity.  Without  this,  we  have  no  secmity  that  Scripture  is 
inspired  of  God. 

All  the  inspiration  which  Mr.  Morell  allows,  is  restricted  to 
brightening  and  elevating  the  intuitional  faculty  so  as  to  render  it 
receptive  of  truth.  He  leaves  the  whole  after-process,  involved  in 
giving  a  formal  expression  to  the  intuitions,  to  the  natural  work- 
ing of  the  human  faculties ;  and  denounces  the  idea  of  Scripture 
being  written  under  the  special  direction  of  the  Spirit  as  a  per- 
nicious and  indefensible  dogma.  This  we  regard  as  nothing  less 
than  an  attempt  to  strip  Scripture  of  its  supernatural  character. 

*  Moreirs  rhilosophy  of  Religion,  p.  160.  +  Ibid.  p.  183.  t  Ibid.  p.  IGl. 

i  Ibid,  p.  173.  'i  Ibid.  p.  171. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVERNMENT.  79 

Tnspii-ation  is  denied  to  the  written  word  contrary  to  its  own 
claims,  and  it  is  attributed  exclusively  to  a  certain  form  of  man's 
own  consciousness.  The  Bible,  in  this  case,  is  not  God's  word 
but  man's.  The  writers  may  have  seen  visions  and  had  the  truth 
revealed  in  their  minds,  but  we  have  no  security  that  they  have 
been  kept  from  error  in  recording  what  they  received,  or  that  they 
have  conveyed  the  truth  ])urely  to  us.  The  idea  that  they  had  no 
special  commission  to  write  and  no  special  guidance  in  writing, 
does  not  harmonize  with  the  solemn  announcement  with  which 
they  often  begin  their  oracles,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord ;"  or  witli 
the  statements,  "holy  men  of  God  spake  as  they  were  moved 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,"  and  "  all  Scripture  is  given  by  inspira- 
tion of  God."  The  elevation  of  the  religious  consciousness,  by 
special  and  extraordinary  agencies,  may  account  for  the  divine 
conceptions  of  the  sacred  penmen.  But,  without  a  continued 
supernatural  agency,  under  which  the  minds  of  the  writers  were 
allowed  to  develop  their  characteristic  peculiarities,  it  is  difficult 
to  account  for  the  structure  of  the  books,  the  "  halo  of  Divine 
glory,"  in  which  these  conceptions  are  expressed.  The  internal 
evidence  shows,  that  in  the  w^ork  of  composition  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  was  with  them. 

Mr.  Morell  fails  to  substantiate  the  old  charges  adduced  to 
weaken  that  evidence.  He  lu-ges-;^  the  imperfect  morality  of  the 
Old  Testament,  as  if  the  word  of  God  necessarily  implied  approval 
of  all  that  it  records.  He  urgesf  discrepancies  between  some  of 
the  scriptural  statements  and  scientific  truth,  as  if  the  Book  of 
Genesis  pretended  to  give  a  scientific  account  of  the  creation,  or  as 
if  it  were  in  open  conflict  with  the  results  of  geological  research. 
He  charges  Paul  with  errors  in  reasoning,  without  specifying  a 
single  instance ;  and  Peter  with  arguing  perversely  about  the  cir- 
cumcision, whereas  everybody  knows  that  Peter  only  acted  against 
his  own  conviction.];  In  this  way  he  backs  his  assertions  that  it 
would  not  be  very  reverent  to  suppose  the  Spirit  of  God  had  any- 
thing to  do  with  such  statements,  and  that  the  writers  of  them 
were  left  to  the  influence  of  the  imperfect  religious,  moral,  and 
scientific  ideas  of  their  times.  These  are  things  much  more  easily 
said  than  proven.  The  only  discrepancies  on  which  objections 
against  plenary  inspiration  can  be  raised,  are  but  as  the  small 
dust  in  the  balance,  compared  with  the  weight  of  proof  that  the 
book  is,  what  it  claims  to  be,  the  word  of  God.  Even  that  small 
dust,  we  are  warranted  from  the  past  to  believe,  will  become  yet 
smaller  and  may  ultimately  vanish  away.  Mr.  Morell's  theory  ol 
inspiration  may  naturally  result  from  his  own  philosophical  prin- 
ciples, but  it  explains  nothing,  is  at  variance  with  palpable  evi- 
dence, at  open  conflict  with  scriptural  claim,  makes  room  for  the 

*  Morell's  riailosophy  of  Eeligiou,  p.  IG7.  +  Ibid.  p. .170.  i  Ibid.  p.  17G. 


80  NATUIIALISJL  ;    Oil,    THE    DEXIAL 

most  latitudinarian  interi5retations,  and,  if  brouglit  to  bear  upon 
the  progress  of  the  church,  would  be  long  in  ushering  in  the 
brighter  day,  of  which  he  speaks,  when  the  gospel  would  come  to 
us,  not  in  word  only,  but  in  demonstration  of  the  spirit  and  in 
power. 

Our  investigation  into  naturalism  has  led  us  from  the  point 
•where  Divine  Providence  is  ignored  in  sustaining  and  garnishing 
the  material  universe,  to  the  point  where  his  presence  is  excluded 
from  the  Bible — his  holy  temple.  We  might  have  passed  on  to 
notice  the  denial  of  Di^^ne  influence  in  regenerating  the  souls  of 
men.  But  this  wiJl  find  a  place  in  the  next  chaj^ter,  when  speak- 
ing of  the  denial  of  the  Divine  redemption.  We  have  tracked  the 
rationalistic  spirit  up  to  the  very  shrine  of  the  holy  oracle,  and 
found  it  there  lurking  under  the  Christian  name  and  professing 
adherence  to  the  Christian  faith.  Between  the  two  points  there  is 
doubtless  a  gulf,  but  it  is  not  an  impassable  one.  The  man  who 
excludes  miraculous  inspiration  from  the  Bible,  may  admit  super- 
natural agency  in  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  even  in  giving 
birth  to  Chi-ikianity ;  but  in  that  exclusion  he  occupies  a  natu- 
ralist position.  On  reviewing  our  track,  then,  we  see  that,  in 
physical  science,  naturalism  has  given  rise  to  the  mechanical  theory 
of  the  universe ;  in  moral  philosophy,  it  has  led  men  to  attach  an 
exclusive  importance  to  external  circumstances  as  influencing 
numan  conduct ;  and  in  theology,  it  has  banished  the  supernatm-al 
from  the  sphere  of  Christianity,  so  as  to  account  for  its  origin  and 
influence  on  ordinary  principles,  or  has  left  but  partial  room  for 
its  operation.  With  a  few  summary  remarks  upon  the  theory  as 
a  whole,  we  shall  close  our  notice  of  it. 

1.  The  idea  of  an  entirely  self-sustaining  universe  is  based  ujwn 
a  false  analogy.  The  regularity  of  nature's  operations  may  have 
given  rise  in  some  minds  to  the  opinion.  And  not  a  few  of  its 
abettors  may  maintain,  that  it  is  a  more  exalted  conception  of 
God  to  represent  the  multiphcity  of  eflects  which  take  place  in 
natiu-e  as  the  result  of  a  single  original  act  of  his  power,  than  to 
conceive  of  Him  as  ever  interposing  in  the  affairs  of  the  world. 
Order  is  the  law  of  heaven.  The  very  regularity  which  is  adduced 
to  favour  the  mechanical  theory,  is  adduced  more  justly  in  proof 
of  the  Divine  presiding  agency.  And  it  is  surely  more  exalting  to 
God  to  view  the  universe  as  directly  dependent  on  his  arm,  and 
ever  pervaded  by  his  presence,  tlian  to  compliment  him  out  of  it 
by  attributing  to  it  a  self-sustained  action.  The  falseness  of  the 
analogy,  however,  is  obvious.  The  movements  in  a  piece  of 
mechanism  do  not,  propeily  speaking,  originate  with  the  meclianist. 
Pie  only  employs  pre-existing  forces,  such  as  gravity,  elasticity, 
cohesion,  and  repulsion.  Now,  tliese  powers  are  the  very  thuigs  to 
be  accounted  for  in  the  theory  which  likens  the  universe  to  a 


OF   THE    DIVINE    PROVIDENTIAL    GOVEENMENT.  81 

maehine.*  In  a  piece  of  liimian  mechanism,  we  can  account  for 
these  properties  irrespective  altogether  of  the  workman.  They 
were  there  before  he  existed,  and  they  continue  after  he  is  gone. 
But,  that  the  universe,  after  having  been  constructed  and  set  in 
motion  by  the  Ahnighty,  has  continued  to  revolve  and  develop 
itself  ever  since,  without  his  providential  agency,  is  a  theory  that 
is  unsupported  by  any  analogy  whatever.  And,  in  the  absence  of 
all  true  analogy,  it  is  more  rational  to  \ie\Y  the  creation  as  always 
directly  dependent  on  the  Creator,  than  to  view  it  as  self-sustained. 
In  fact,  it  is  as  easy  to  conceive  of  a  self-originated  world  as  of  a, 
self-subsisting  world.  The  thing  is  an  impossibility.  Dr.  Harris 
says,!  "  the  reasoniug  which  comj^liments  God  out  of  the  material 
universe  not  imfrequently  ends  in  excluding  Him  from  the  Throne 
of  his  moral  government."  May  it  not  be  said  that  the  one  is 
done  for  the  sake  of  the  other  ? 

2.  This  theory,  as  it  is  often  advocated,  is  cliargeahle  with  anthro- 
pomorphism. While  professing  to  exalt  God,  it  virtually  degrades 
Him.  It  thinks  of  Him  as  if  He  were  such  an  one  as" ourselves. 
The  piece  of  human  mechanism  saves  the  labour  of  the  artist.  He 
can  set  it  in  motion  and  go  his  way.  And  the  machine  is  con- 
sidered to  be  more  ingenious  and  complete,  the  more  that  it 
dispenses  with  the  interposition  of  the  constructor.  But  to  reason 
in  a  similar  manner  regarding  the  Almiglity  and  liis  works,  is  to 
ascribe  unto  Him  the  limitations  and  imperfections  of  the  human 
fiiculties.  His  presence  in  one  part  of  his  dominions  does  not 
imply  his  absence  elsewhere.  An  infidel  philosophy  has  often,  by 
the  anthropomorphism  of  its  reasoning,  endeavoured,  with  a  feigned 
homage,  to  exclude  the  Eternal  from  the  management  of  the  uni- 
verse. This  was  involved  in  the  astronomical  objection  against 
Christianity,  which  has  been  so  eloquently  repelled  by  Dr.'^Chal- 
mers  in  his  "  Astronomical  Discourses."  The  modern  astronomv 
has  wonderfully  enlarged  our  conceptions  of  the  magnitude  and 
extent  of  the  material  universe,  and  shown  that  this  earth  occupies 
but  a  small  place  in  the  vast  creation.  Pliilosophical  infidels 
urged  that  our  world,  being  comparatively  so  insignificant,  could 
not  have  had  centered  upon  it  such  special  regards  of  the  Almighty 
as  the  Christian  scheme  represents.  At  the  very  root  of  "this 
objection  lay  the  principle  of  conceiving  of  the  Most  High  a« 
acting  after  the  manner  of  men.  It  is  just  clothing  the  Divine 
Being  with  the  impotency  of  the  human.  "  It  is  oiu-  imperfection 
that  we  cannot  give  our  attention  to  more  than  one  object,  at  one 
and  the  same  instant  of  time ;  but  surely  it  would  elevate  our 
every  idea  of  the  perfections  of  God,  did  we  know,  that  while  his 
comprehensive  mind  could  grasp  the  whole  amplitude  of  nature  to 
the   veiy  outermost  of  its  boundaries,  He  had  an  attentive  eye 

*  Dug.ild  Stewart.  +  Pre-Adamito  Earth,  p.  12S. 

G 


82  katuPlAlism  ;  ok,  the  denial 

fastened  on  tlie  veiy  humblest  of  its  objects,  and  pondered  eveiy 
thought  of  my  heart,  and  noticed  every  footstep  of  my  goings,  and 
treasured  up  in  his  remembrance  every  turn  and  every  movement 
of  my  history."*  And  as  this  would  be  the  most  glorious  concep- 
tion of  God,  it  must  be  the  true  one,  for,  as  John  Foster  remarks,! 
*'  to  say  that  v/e  can,  in  the  abstract,  conceive  of  a  magnitude  of 
intelligence  and  j^ower  which  would  constitute  the  Deity,  if  He 
possessed  it,  a  more  glorious  and  adorable  Being  than  He  actually 
is,  could  be  nothing  less  than  flagi'ant  impiety."  The  antlu'o- 
pomorphising  view  of  the  Almighty  is  brought  out  very  palpably 
in  some  of  om'  modern  books  of  science  which  advocate  the  natural 
development  hypothesis.  The  £vuthor  of  the  "  Vestiges"  speaks  of 
it  as  "  nothing  less  than  a  mean  view  of  the  Great  Author,  to  sup- 
pose Him  obliged  to  come  in  on  frequent  occasions  with  new  feats 
or  special  interferences."  And  the  question  is  asked,  "Is  it  con- 
ceivable, as  a  fitting  mode  of  exercise  for  creative  intelligence, 
that  it  should  be  constantly  paying  especial  attention  to  the  creation 
of  species?"!  Here,  the  Divine  Being  is  assimilated  to  the  human. 
He  is  stripped  of  the  attributes  of  omnipresence  and  omniscience 
vrhich  enter  into  the  glories  of  his  incomprehensible  character. 
This  is  a  damning  evidence  against  tliis  theory  of  naturalism.  It 
makes  God  like  to  corruptible  man.  Whereas,  on  the  super- 
natural theory,  while  his  name  is  excellent  in  all  the  earth,  liis 
glory  is  set  above  the  heavens. 

3.  The  theory  which  excludes  the  Divine  agency  from  the  uni- 
verse, and  abandons  it  to  natural  laAvs,  is  opposed  to  the  2'>ctlpcd>lc 
evidence  of  geology.  This  science  has  established,  beyond  a  doubt, 
not  only  that  our  globe  has  repeatedly  undergone  great  changes 
previous  to  its  becoming  the  habitation  of  man,  but  that  during 
these  changes  several  successive  creations  of  animal  and  vegetable 
life  have  taken  place.  The  organic  remains  imbedded  in  strata, 
that  had  been  formed  ages  anterior  to  the  existence  of  the  human 
race,  (these  strata  being  separated  from  each  other  by  considerable 
periods  of  duration,)  furnish  evidence  of  v/hole  groups  having  been 
swept  away  by  some  violent  agencies,  and  of  entirely  new  races 
having  been  called  into  being  to  supply  their  place.  Geology  tell.^ 
us  that  the  temperature  of  the  globe  in  a  remote  antiquity  was 
such,  that  our  present  races  of  animals  and  vegetables  could 
not  tlien  have  existed,  and  that  the  creatures  then  existing,  could 
not  have  lived  now.  This  being  the  case,  the  inference  is  obvious, 
that  new  creations  of  animal  and  vegetable  life  must  have  oc- 
curred, between  whose  natures  and  the  changed  earth  there  sub- 
sisted a  nice  adaptation.  Now  it  is  for  the  production  of  these 
new  races  that  we  demand  the  interj)osition  of  God.     There  is  no 

*  Chalmers's  Astronomical  Discourses. 

+  Foster's  Contributions  to  the  Eclectic,—"  Review  of  Chalmers," 

%  Vestiges,  pp.  165,  169,  5th  edition. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    mOVlDENTIAL   GOVERNilENT.  83 

]  ower  in  the  laws  of  nature  to  produce  tliem.     "  The  growth  of 
new  systems  out  of  old  ones,"  says  the  gi-eat  Newton,  "  without  tlie 
mediation  of  Divine  Power,  is  absui'd."     Man,  compared  with  the 
ages  that  elapsed  before  his  creation,  is  but  a  very  recent  being  on 
the  earth.     For  the  production  of  a  creature  so  distinct  in  his  in- 
tellectual and  moral  qualities  from  the  whole  animal  creation,  a 
new  exertion  of  the  creative  power  of  God  was  necessary.     Tiieories 
of  spontaneous  generation  and  of  transmutation  of  the  species 
have  not  been  wanting.     But  these  theories  have  never  risen  any 
higher  than  vague  fancies.     The  records  of  geology  furnish  no 
indication  of  such  phenomena.     And,  as  Cuvier  asks,  wliy,  if  sucli 
transmutations  have  occurred,  do  not  the  bowels  of  the  e"arth  pre- 
serve the  records  of  such  a  curious  genealogy  ?     In  the  domain  of 
fossil  geology,  we  discover  abundant  remains  of  distinct  species,. 
but  not  a  single  specimen  of  any  species  being  in  a  state  of  trans 
mutation  has  been  met  with.     The  faith  of  the  most  distinguished 
geologists   and   anatomists    is  very   unaniinous    on    this    jioint. 
The    first    proposition    which    Cuvier  establishes    is,   that    the 
species  now  living  are  not  mere  varieties  of  the  species  which 
are  lost.     "  For  myself,"  says   Agassiz,  "  I  have  the  conviction 
that   species  have   been    created   successively   at   distinct  inter- 
A'als,  and  that  the  changes  which  they  have  undergone  during 
a   geological   epoch   are  very  secondary,  relating  only  to    then- 
fecundity,  and  to  migrations  dependent-  on  epochal  influences."^: 
Lyell  gives  it  as  the  result  of  a  careful  inquiry,  "  that  species  have 
a  real  existence  in  nature,  and  that  each  was  endovv'ed  at  the  time 
of  its  creation  with  the  attributes  and  organs  by  which  it  is  now 
distinguished."!      "Everything,"  says   Sir   Charles   Bell,  in   his 
"  Bridgewater  Treatise,"  "  declares  the  species  to  have  its  origin 
in  a  distinct  creation,  not  in  a  gi'adual  variation  from  some  original 
type ;  and  any  other  hypothesis  than  that  of  a  new  creation  of 
animals  suited  to  the  successive  changes  in  the  inorganic  matter 
of  the  globe — the  condition  of  the  water,  atmosphere,  and  tem- 
perature— brings  Avitli  it  only  an  accumulation  of  difficulties."    On 
the  strength  of  all  this  high  testimony,  we  may  say  with  Dr. 
Chalmers,  that  it  places  our  argument  for  the  interposal  of  God, 
on  firm  vantage  groinid,  to  assert,  that  were  all  the  aiTangements  of 
our  existing  natural  history  destroyed,  all  the  known  forces  of  our 
existing  natural  philosophy  could  not  replace  them.     The  records 
of  geology  are  thus  shown  to  be  the  records  of  a  special  Providence. 
And,  as  Conybeare  justly  remarks,  the  geological  evidence  strikes 
at  once  at  the  root  of  every  sceptical  argument  against  miracles. 
If  God  has  specially  interposed  in  the  ages  preceding  the  present 
state  of  the  globe,  is  there  not  a  strong  presumption  that  He  has 
done  so  at  the  most  wondrous  epoch  of  om-  earth's  history  —the 

*  Dr.  Harris's  Pre-Adamite  Earth,  p.  287. 
+  Lyoll's  Principles  of  Geology,  vol.  ii.  p.  65, 1st  edition. 

o  2 


84  NATUEALISM  ;    Oil,    THE    BEXIAL 

introduction  of  Christianity ;  and  that  at  soin°  future  period,  He 
will  again  interpose  for  the  accomplishment  of  his  high  purposes. 
Geology  convicts  naturalism  of  falsehood,  \Yhile  it  warrants  us  to 
credit'^the  miracles  and  revelations  of  the  Bible,  if  authenticated 
on  the  broad  ground  of  evidence.  The  Almighty  had  not  with- 
drawn from  the  world  in  the  remote  past,  but  presided  over  it  as 
sovereign  Lord,  and,  on  befitting  occasions,  made  bare  his  arm  in 
new  exertions  of  creative  energj".  And  why  should  it  be  ques- 
tioned that  He  is  there  still,  touching  all  the  springs  of  life  and 
motion,  and  upholding  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power  ? 

4.  Christianity  and  its  effects  are  phenomena  for  ivhich  natiir- 
alism  assigns  no  adequate  cause.  The  theory  of  Strauss,  that  tho 
church  made  its  founder  in  the  natural  progress  of  events,  and 
out  of  the  Messianic  conceptions  existing  at  the  birth  of  Jesus, — 
that  the  grand  miracles  which  signalised  his  history  were  merely 
a  kind  of  mythological  clothing  gradually  tlu-own  around  Him 
by  his  followers  in  order  to  exalt  their  hero,  is  a  more  idle  fancy 
than  any  of  the  hypotheses  of  spontaneous  generation  and  trans- 
mutation of  the  species,  which  have  been  formed  to  account  foi 
the  origin  of  our  races.  Geology  gives  not  a  more  decided  nega- 
tive to  the  one  theory  than  historical  facts  do  to  the  other.  It 
is  a  foolhardy  attempt  to  account  for  a  creation  without  the  inter- 
vention of  the  Great  Creator.  Christianity  is  a  new  creation,  and 
naturalism  ascribes  it  to  a  <;ause  wliich  did  not  at  the  time  exist, 
and  which,  if  it  had  existed,  would  have  been  altogether  inade- 
quate to  the  effect.  The  conceptions  of  the  Hebrew  nation  re- 
specting the  mission,  character,  and  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  were 
far  from  being  realised  in  Him  who  claimed  to  be  the  Son  of  the 
Highest  and  the  Christ  of  promise.  Indeed,  the  notions  of  his 
immediate  disciples,  up  to  the  time  of  his  leaving  the  world,  were 
ever  coming  into  conflict  with  his  sayings  and  doings ;  and  their 
attachment  to  his  cause,  notwithstanding,  can  only  be  accounted 
for  on  the  belief  of  an  evidence  and  agency  that  lay  beyond  the 
influence  of  these  conceptions.  The  character  of  Christ,  it  has 
generally  been  admitted  even  by  infidels,  is  altogether  unique; 
and  some  of  them  have  granted  that  the  invention  of  such  a  noble 
character  by  the  first  discii)les  would  have  been  a  greater  miracle 
than  any  that  is  recorded.  It  is  magnifying  the  effect  much  above 
the  cause ;  it  is  investing  the  creation  with  a  glory  that  did  not 
belong  to  the  creator,  to  assert,  that  a  character  so  absolutely  com- 
plete in  all  the  elements  of  moral  grandeur,  and  standing  alone  in 
its  majesty  on  the  pages  of  history,  originated  in  Jewish  concep 
tions  thrown  around  the  skeleton  of  an  historic  reality.  "  The 
author  of  a  new  creation,"  remarks  D'Aubigne,-  "  must  not  him- 
self come  of  the  old  creation  which  he  is  to  change.     The  regene- 

*  D'Aubigiie'a  Discourses  and  Essfiya,  p.  336. 


or    THE    DIVINE    PnOVlDENTlAL    GOVERNMENT.  85 

rator  of  the  human  race  must  not  himself  be  a  polluted  member 
of  the  corrupt  body  which  he  is  going  to  purify.  He  who  comes 
to  bring  a  divine  life  into  the  world  must  himself  emanate  from 
that  life  and  possess  it  in  its  fulness ;  for  how  otherwise  can  he 
communicate  it  ?  The  first  man  of  the  new  creation  must  issue 
from  the  hand  of  God,  as  did  the  first  man  of  the  old  creation." 
There  are  two  stubborn  things  which  the  theory  of  Strauss  cannot 
solve.  The  first  is,  why,  if  Christ  answered  to  the  conceptions  of 
the  Jews,  was  He  persecuted  by  them,  and  the  more  in  proportion 
as  He  manifested  Himself?  The  second  is,  why,  after  his  death, 
the  death,  according  to  them,  of  an  impostor  and  blasphemer,  was 
He  received  by  so  many  thousands  of  the  people  who  had  formerly 
rejected  Him  ?  To  ascribe  all  this  to  the  mere  natural  course  of 
things,  exclusive  of  a  Divine  interposal,  is,  if  possible,  more  absurd 
tliian  to  account  for  the  creation  of  the  universe  without  the  agency 
of  the  Great  First  Cause.  Whether  we  consider  the  age  —  an  age 
of  unbelief  and  derision — in  which  Christianity  as  a  "myth"  is 
said  to  have  arisen,  or  the  men  with  their  strongly-rooted  adverse 
jirejudices,  to  whom  the  origin  of  the  myths  is  assigned,  we  see 
the  wild  unphilosophical  character  of  the  Straussian  theory.  It 
accounts  still  less  for  the  success  of  such  a  myth  as  Christianity 
among  the  Gentil-es,  opposed  as  it  was  at  all  points  to  their  systems 
of  superstition  and  philosophy.  "  In  truth,"  as  Mr.  Henry  Rogers 
remarks, -N-  "  nothing  less  than  a  universal  lunacy  of  the  nations 
will  account,  under  such  circumstances,  for  its  reception  by  them."f 
And  as  the  origin  of  Christianity  cannot  be  accounted  for, 
except  on  the  belief  of  a  supernatural  interposition,  so  it  is 
impossible  to  account  for  the  mighty  effects  of  Christianity,  except 
on  the  belief  of  an  accompanying  supernatural  influence.  It  has 
])een  soundly  argued  that  the  marked  contrast  between  the  writings 
of  the  apostles  and  those  of  the  most  ancient  fathers,  can  only  be 

*  Appeiulix  to  Rogers's  Reason  and  Faitb. 

t  "  Geriuau  theories,  thoutrh  they  have  bi-oken  clown  in  quick  succession  at 
home,  have  been  imported  as  if  still  good,  and  have  been  done  into  English  without 
scruple."  To  this  remark  of  the  author  of  "  The  Restoration  of  Belief,"  the  theory 
of  Strauss  is  no  exception.  Germany  is  getting  ashamed  of  it.  Yet  this  is  sub- 
stantially the  theory,  though  Gfriirer  is  the  great  authority  referred  to  that  Mr 
Mackay  has  re-produced  in  his  "  Progress  of  the  Intellect,"  chap.  8.  vol  ii  He 
fathers  the  idea  of  a  superhuman  Messiah  on  ''a  visionary  sugi^estion"  that  rose 
mthe  Hebrew  mind  when  suffering  under  Persian  oppression  — this  suggestion 
or  wish  "  filled  up  the  blank  of  political  disappointment"— this  wish,  in  due  time 
assumed  "  the  fixity  of  dogmatical  theory"  — and  this  wish  threw  around  "the 
Messianic  champion  "  miraculous  glories  and  God-like  qualities.  In  other  words 
the  church  created  its  founder.  Mr.  Mackay  has  no  doubt  of  it.  He  describes 
the  process  as  coolly  and  deliberately  as  if  it  were  a  piece  of  art,  the  fashioning 
of  which  he  had  witnessed  in  the  artist's  studio.  Like  some  of  his  Gei-man  proto- 
types, however,  he  overshoots  the  mark,  when  he  tells  us,  in  the  face  of  historical 
evidence  to  the  contrary,  that  the  record  of  Christ's  life,  having  "  a  supernatural 
colouring,"  was  given  to  the  world  "when  the  generation  of  his  contemporaries 
■was  extinct."  He  makes  Christ  to  have  been  an  ingenious  impostor,  the  evan- 
gchsts  to  have  been  very  clever  knaves,  and  the  sceptical  age  in  which  Chris- 
tianity was  received  to  have  been  an  age  of  great  simpletons.  All  this  has  been 
said  over  and  over  again  long  ago.    There  is  here  no  "  Progress  of  the  Intellect." 


B5  KATURALISM  ;    OR.    THE    DENIAL 

explained  on  tlie  suppositioi]  that  the  sacred  penmen  wrote  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Spirit  of  God.-  And  the  radical  and 
beneficent  change  which  the  progress  of  Christianity  lias  wrought 
on  individuals  and  connnunities,  argues  that  it  has  coine_  iu 
demonstration  of  tlie  Sphit  and  in  power.  Human  depravity  is  a 
stubborn  fact  which  no  theory  of  naturalism  can  get  rid  of. 
ludividuals  and  nations  have  been  placed  in  the  most  favourable 
external  circumstances,  and  yet  their  depravity  has  grown  with 
their  gi-owth,  and  strengthened  with  theii'  strength.  Tlie  power  of 
mere  natural  influences  has  failed  to  reach  the  depths  of  that 
depravity,  and  elevate  man  to  a  high  and  holy  character.  The 
Christian  revelation,  accompanied  by  that  Divine  energy  v.dnch 
originated  it,  has  been  brought  to  bear  on  human  nature,  and 
tliat  nature,  in  thousands  of  instances,  it  has  thoroughly  renewed, 
and  maintained  in  its  moral  dig-nity  in  a  world  where  so  many 
natural  influences  tend  to  debase  it.  This  fact,  taken  along  with 
another,  viz.  that  the  best  men  in  every  age  have  been  firm 
believers  in  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence,  goes  to  prove  that 
Christianity  and  its  beuignant  deeds  are  effects  which  point  to  the 
agency  of  the  Great  Spirit  that  at  first  moved  upon  the  face  of  the 
waters  and  garnished  the  world. 

5.  It  need  scarcely  be  remarked,  that  natm-alism,  whethe?* 
viewed  as  excluding  JDivine  Providence  from  the  government  ol 
the  spheres,  or  from  interposing  in  the  concerns  of  men,  is 
diametrically  op}iosed  to  the  religion  of  the  Bible.  The  constant; 
concurrence  of  the  Divine  will  with  the  operation  of  secondary 
causes,  is  alike  the  doctrine  of  sound  reason  and  scripturiil  truth. 
"  jl'.Iy  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work,"  said  the  Great  Teacher, 
—  an  expression  which  seems  to  refer  to  the  conjunct  agency  of 
tiie  Father  and  Son  in  producing  the  Christian  miracles,  and  the 
works  of  Providence  in  general.  It  is  said  of  Him  who  is  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  that  "by  him  all  things  consist,  and  that  he 
upholdeth  all  things  by  the  word  of  his  power."  Passages  like 
these,  with  which  the  feook  of  God  is  thickly  strewed,  sliow  that 
any  attempt  to  remove  God  to  a  distance  from  the  creation,  or  to 
explode  the  idea  of  Providence,  wars  Avith  the  record  of  revealed 
truth.  The  Scriptures,  as  we  have  seen,  assert  their  own  in- 
spiration. And  tlicir  testimony  is  clear  in  regard  to  the  necessity 
of  Divine  influence  to  regenerate  men.     This  is  a  great  mystery, 

*  '^  The  interval  between  tlie  Scrintures  and  the  very  best  of  tbc  Fathers  is  so 
immense  that  not  a  few  bave  testified  tbat  it  forms  to  them  the  most  convincing 
i^rooFof  the  inspired  origin  of  tbe  former;  it  being,  iu  their  judgment,  absurd  to 
suppose  that  any  man—  much  less  a  nnmberof  men— could  have  composed  such  a 
voliime  as  the  IJibbi.in  an  age  in  wliich  iheirimmediate  successors,  many  of  them 
possessing  undoubted  genius  and  erudition,  and  having  the  advantage  of  such  a 
model  could  fall  into  puerilities  so  gross,  and  errors  so  monstrous.  I  or  ourselvog 
we  could  sooner  believe  that  Jacob  Buhmen  could  have  composed  the  Novum 
Organ um,'  or  'Ihomas  Sternhold  the  '  raradise  Lost:"  — Eogers's  Essmjs  from 
the  Edinhurnh  Eevieiv,  vol  ii.  pp.  12'^  124, 


OF   TUE    DIVINE    PIlOVlDENTIAL    COVIlRNMENT.  87 

who  then  can  believe  it  ?  Its  mysleriousness  is  admitted  in  the 
very  25assage  that  asserts  its  necessity.*  Strip  Christianity  of  its 
mysteries,  and  you  stiip  it  of  its  glory.  "A  religion  without 
its  mysteries,"  savs  Robert  Hall,  "  is  like  a  temple  vrithout  its 
God." 

Bat  you  cannot  get  rid  of  the  mysterious.  Naturalism  banishes 
the  Creator  to  a  distance  from  the  creation,  resolves  everything 
into  the  unaided  operation  of  established  laws,  and  thinks  that  the 
mysteiy  is  greatly  lessened.  But,  in  truth,  it  is  gi-eatly  increased 
The  stupendous  systems  of  worlds  on  worlds  moving  in  haimony 
tln-oughouL  the  fields  of  space,  without  the  ever-present  agency  of 
Him  vvho  made  them,  is  a  mystery  more  baffling  and  less  sublime 
than  the  same  system  viewed  as  directly  dependent  on  the 
presidency  and  power  of  God.  It  is  confessedly  mysterious  how 
the  Divine  Spirit  works  on  the  human  mind,  so  as  in  the  case  of 
inspu-ation  to  allow  free  intellectual  action,  and  in  the  case  of 
regeneration  not  to  infringe  on  moral  liberty.  But  so  it  is. 
Scripture  attests  it,  and  the  subjects  of  Divine  influence  in  either 
case  have  been  conscious  of  it  Naturalism  guards  the  human 
mind  and  Imman  concerns  from  such  an  interposal,  and  thinks 
that  it  has  cleared  the  nioral  world  of  a  mystery.  But  it  is  not  so. 
The  Bible,  in  its  grand  disclosures  and  rolje  of  solitary  majesty,  is 
much  more  inexplicable  without  inspiration  than  with  it.  And 
how  moral  evil — that  most  insoluble  of  all  mysteries — should  be 
coimteracted,  and  men  rescued  from  its  pov/er,  by  the  mere  play 
of  natural  influences,  is  assuredly  more  mysterious  and  unac- 
countable than  that  it  should  be  accomplished  by  the  Spirit  of 
God. 

In  fine,  naturalism,  viewed  in  all  its  bearings,  is  most  unnatural 
It  has  a  universe  independent  of  Him  who  created  it.  It  has  a 
Christ,  a  Gospel,  and  a  Church,  for  the  existence  of  which  no 
higher  cause  is  assigned  than  Jewish  conceptions  and  traditions. 
It  has  a  world  in  wdiich  moral  evil  abounds,  and  depraved  human 
heai'ts  exist,  for  overcoming  and  regenerating  which,  it  ignores  all 
but  natural  influences.  In  attempting  to  get  rid  of  mysteries  the 
most  sublime  and  ennobling,  it  falls  into  mysteries  far  more  per- 
plexing but  less  elevating.  Were  the  two  systems  to  be  tested  by 
the  attribute  of  mysteriousness,  we  would  pi-efer  snpernaturalism 
with  its  mysteries  to  rationalism  with  its  mysteries. 

*  JoLa  iii,  7,  8. 


88  SPIRITUALISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    DENIAL    OF    THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION-,   OR   SPIRITUALISM. 

Change  in  the  enemy's  tactics — Rationalism  confessedly  beaten  on  the  field  of 
Biblical  criticism  —  Coleridge's  remark  —  The  doctrines  of  redemption  granted 
by  rationalistic  theologians  and  philosophers,  to  be  in  the  sacrud  text — The 
warfare  shifted  from  the  ground  of  critical  interpretation  to  that  of  speculative 
philosophy  —  Change  that  has  come  over  Unitarianism  :  its  pi-etensions  philo- 
sophical rather  than  exegetical  —  The"  School  of  Progress" — Parker's  "Dis- 
course on  Religion" — Newmans  "Phases  of  Faith"— Mackay's  "Progress  of 
the  Intellect" — Tendency  of  :Mr.  Morell's  speculations  —  Examination  of  the 
moral  argument  against  the  evangelical  doctrines  — The  argument  stated — 
Refutation  of  it:  unsupported  by  analogy — View  given  by  it  of  the  Divine 
character  is  one-sided  and  partial  —  Scripture  doctrine  of  depravity  accords 
with  actual  condition  of  man  —  Pardon  on  the  ground  of  an  atonement  con 
sistent  with  the  paternity  of  God — Reasonableness  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  of 
spiritual  regeneration— Sustained  by  an  appeal  to  three  undeniable  facts  — 
Charge  of  gloominess  against  the  doctrines  of  redemption  shown  to  be  un- 
founded—  Quotations  from  Jonathan  Edwards  and  Cowper. 

More  than  half  a  centmy  ago,  the  battle  raged  keeuly  between 
the  defendants  and  assailants  of  the  New  Testament  doctrines  on 
the  field  of  Biblical  criticism.  Neology  and  rationalism  in  Ger- 
tnauy  brought  a  large  though  unhallowed  amount  of  scholarship 
to  the  attempt  to  exjoel  from  the  sacred  yolume  those  doctrines 
which  have  been  generally  regarded  as  its  distinguishing  truths. 
And  the  same  warfare  was  prosecuted  with  much  \igt)ur  in  our 
owD  country.  Tlie  cool  daring  of  the  French  atheistical  philoso- 
phy infected  men's  minds ;  and  individuals  who  professed  to  in- 
terpret the  Divine  Book,  set  about  demolishing  one  text  after 
another  that  favomed  the  obnoxious  articles  of  atonement  and 
spiritual  regeneration,  as  men  set  about  destroying  the  underwood 
of  a  forest  in  order  to  build  them  houses  on  the  clear  gi-ound. 
Christendom  for  a  while  looked  on  appalled.  But  the  work  of 
destruction  was  soon  seen  not  to  be  the  work  of  interpretation. 
And,  after  the  alarm  and  heat  of  the  first  onset  were  past,  the  at- 
tempt to  expunge  the  doctrines  of  the  incarnation,  atonement, 
and  regenerating  influences  of  the  Spirit,  from  the  sacred  record, 
was  pronounced  a  more  complete  faikne  than  the  attempt  in  France 
wholly  to  explode  the  idea  of  God  from  the  heart  of  society.  On 
the  ground  of  criticism,  then,  the  dispute,  as  is  generally  admitted,, 
has  been  decided  in  favour  of  the  great  doctrines  of  redem2')tion. 
It  is  only  such  a  man  as  Mr.  Foxton,  late  of  Oxford,  that  ven- 
tures now  to  say  that  "in  the  teaching  of  Christ  Himself,  there  is 
not  tlic  slightest  allusion  to  tlie  modern  evangelical  notion  of  an 
atonement."^:-  It  is  only  such  a  kindred  spirit  as  Mr.  Newman, 
formerly  fellow  of  Balliol,  wliose  faith,  having  passed  through  so 
many  phases,  has  at  last  got  into  the  ecUpse,  that  "  can  testify 

*  Foxloa's  I'upular  Chvisti;uuty,  p.  C7. 


OF    THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION  89 

that  the  atonement  may  be  dropt  out  of  Pauline  religion  Avithout 
affecting  its  quality."-;^  Such  a  style  of  writing  as  this  is  only  to 
be  rivalled  by  asserting  that  Hamlet  would  still  be  Hamlet  thoagh 
the  part  of  Hamlet  were  omitted.  Nothing  but  a  system  of  mon- 
strously forced  interpretation  —  so  forced  that,  if  applied  to  ex- 
tract a  meaning  from  any  human  composition,  it  would  raise  the 
shout  of  dishonesty  —  could  expel  these  doctrines  from  Holy  Writ, 
strip  the  text  of  all  that  is  peculiar  to  the  Gospel,  reduce  its  the- 
ology to  a  mere  theism,  and  the  teaching  of  Jesus  to  a  morality 
somewhat  elevated  above  the  best  of  the  heathen.  The  mode  of 
attack,  accordingly,  has  been  changed,  the  ground  of  warfare  has 
been  shifted.  But  there  is  the  sacred  text  speaking  as  loudly  and 
clearly  for  the  atonement  and  the  doctrines  inseparably  connected 
with  it,  as  the  stars  in  their  courses  and  the  earth  with  its  teem- 
ing productions,  speak  for  the  existence  and  providential  agency 
of  God.  Coleridge  spoke  strongly,  but  not  more  strongly  than 
tnaly,  when  he  said  that  "  Socinians  would  lose  all  character  for 
honesty,  if  they  were  to  explain  their  neighbour's  will  with  the 
same  latitude  of  interpretation,  which  they  do  the  Scriptures." 
"  I  told  them,"  —  at  a  time  when  he  was  far  ahead  of  them,  as  he 
himself  informs  us — "  I  told  them  plainly  and  openly,  that  it  was 
clear  enough  John  and  Paul  were  not  unitarians."f 

Such  has  become  the  opinion  of  many  of  the  rationalistic  theo- 
logians, and  philosophers  of  Germany.  Christianity  with  them 
may  be  either  true  or  false,  but  they  are  constrained  to  admit  that 
what  ai-e  usually  regarded  as  its  peculiar  doctrines,  iii-e  contained 
in  the  sacred  volume.  Schelling  and  Hegel |  assume  the  exist- 
ence of  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  incarnation,  atonement,  the 
lapsed  condition  of  man,  and  the  regeneration  of  the  soul  by  the 
Holy  Spirit;  and  attempt,  in  the  tnie  rationalistic  mode,  to  de- 
duce the  whole  from  philosophical  principles.  Their  Christology 
in  so  fai-  as  doctrinal  articles  are  concerned,  differs  but  little  from 
the  evangelical  creed.  The  Trinity  and  incarnation  may  be  ex- 
plained according  to  a  theory  of  development  which  denudes  them 
of  their  surpassing  glory,  bivt  that  they  are  in  the  Bible  is  not 
denied.  The  idea  of  the  doctrine  of  the  fall  and  of  redemption 
by  Christ,  as  enunciated  in  their  philosophy,  agrees  in  the  main 
with  evangelical  principles,  however  contrary  to  these  may  be  the 
attempt  to  deduce  them  on  principles  of  pure  science.  The  doc- 
trine of  the  fall  is  explained  as  being  the  disuniting  of  the  human 

*  Newman's  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  103,  ^       .      .  ,., 

+  Mr.  Theodore  Parker  thus  speaks  of  the  "Old  School"  of  unitarians,  which 
he  has  outgrown,  though  in  a  very  different  way  from  Coleridge  :  "It  the  Athaii- 
asian  Creed,  the  thirty-nine  articles  of  the  English  church,  and  the  pope  a  bull 
'  Unigenitus,'  could  be  found  in  a  Greek  manuscript,  and  be  proved  to  be  the  work 
of  an 'inspired' apostle,  no  doubt  unitarianism  would  in  good  faith  explain  all 
three,  and  deny  that  they  taught  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  or  the  fall  of  man." 
—  Discourse  on  lirUgion,  p  3."j7. 

i  Morell's  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  pp.  152, 100. 


90  SPIRITUALISM  ;    Orx,    the    DEN1A.I. 

■\rill  from  the  Divine  vrill.  AvA  redemption  is  regaraed  as  the 
reunion  of  man's  will  to  God.  The  rationalism  of  the  system  is 
broad  and  palpable.  But  it  is  Fcmething  in  advance  of  former 
speculations,  that  the  Christian  doctrines  are  admitted  to  be  in 
the  text  of  the  Bible.  Siicli  intrepid  thinkers,  the  very  spirit  of 
whose  philosophy  is  destructive  of  the  influence  of  the  Gospel, 
virtually  declare  that  tlie  attempt  to  extrude  the  evangelical  doc- 
trines from  the  sacred  record  is  vain,  and  that,  be  tbey  true  or 
false,  they  must  be  recognised  as  occupying  a  prominent  place  in 
that  book  which  claims  to  be  from  lieaven. 

Strauss,  who  is  a  true  Hegelian,  and  who,  as  we  have  seen,  has 
exploded  an  historical  gospel  for  the  sake  of  a  philosophical  creed, 
has  adopted  and  more  fully  developed  the  same  view  of  the  leading 
Christian  doctrines.  He  denounces  as  strongly  the  old  rationalistic 
method  of  interpretation  as  he  does  the  idea  of  a  supernatural 
intervention.  He  denies  the  historical  truth  of  the  New  Testament, 
but  he  admits  the  gospels  to  be  miraculous  in  their  textm-e,  and 
that  the  orthodox  tenets  are  contained  in  them.  His  principle  is, 
not  that  there  are  no  miracles  in  the  sacred  record,  but  that  the 
miracles  there  related  cannot  be  literally  true,  for  miracles  are  an 
impossibility.  His  principle  is,  not  that  the  dogmas  of  the  Trinity, 
incarnation,  atonement,  the  fall  of  man,  and  his  regerieration  by 
the  Spirit,  have  no  place  in  the  Scripture  text,  but  that  they  are  a 
series' of  myths  or  philosophical  iigments,  which  can  be  explained 
on  the  principles  of  Hegelianism.  Thus,  in  Germany,  the  attempt 
to  interpr*?t  the  New  Testament  so  as  to  expunge  from  it  the 
peculiar  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  reduce  it  to  little  more  than 
a  mere  theism, — the  attempt  to  make  John  and  Paul  Socinians, 
— has  been  for  the  most  part  abandoned.  The  hostility  to  these 
doctrines,  as  princi])les  of  evangelism,  may  not  a  whit  be  abated, 
but  it  is  granted  that  they  are  in  the  sacred  canon.  And  the 
wai-fare  against  them  is,  to  a  consideraJjle  degree,  shifted  from  the 
ground  of  critical  interpretation  to  that  of  speculative  philosophy. 

It  has  been  said  that  Unitarianism  gravitates  towards  ration- 
alism. And,  accordingly,  the  change  that  has  come  over  German 
rationahsm,  has,  in  some  meastu-e,  influenced  English  and 
American-  unitarianism.  It  is  assuming  something  like  the 
shape  of  a  religious  philosophy.  We  seldom  meet  it  in  the  field 
of  critical  exegesis,  and,  generally,  wherever  we  do  meet  it,  the 
weapons  of  the  new  philosophy  are  found  in  its  hands.  It  was 
from  the  sensational  philosophy  that  the  unitarianism  of  the  last 

*  "  It  is  probable,"  says  Dr.  Baird,  "  that  unitarianism  in  tlie  United  States  will 
disappear  in  process  of  time  vei-y  much  as  it  avose—gradualbj.  The  more  serious 
wili  return,  if  proper  measures  be  piu-sued,  to  tlie  evangelical  churches  — many 
have  done 'so  within  the  last  twenty  years.  Tliose  who  have  embraced  the 
transcendental  and  pantheistic  views  will  go  further  astray,  until  they  end  in 
downright  infidelity  and  deism.  Indeed,  that  is  their  present  position,  so  far  as 
concerns  their  opinions  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  and  the  Divine 
nature."  —  TAc  Religious  Condition  of  Christendom,  p.  005, 1852. 


01'   THE    BIBLE    KEDEMPTION.         "  91 

century  took  its  character.  In  the  time  of  Priestley  and  sub- 
sequently, it  was  deeply  stamped  with  liis  own  fatalism  and  ma- 
terialism. And  everybody  knows  how  D'Alembert  and  Voltaire  ex- 
idted  in  its  progress,  and  hailed  it  as  an  ally  in  the  war  in  which  they 
themselves  were  engaged.  A  writer  in  the  Encyclopedie  rem.arks: 
"  The  Unitarians  have  always  been  regarded  as  Cliristian  divines, 
who  had  only  broken  and  torn  off  a  few  branches  of  the  tree,  but 
still  held  to  the  trunk ;  whereas  they  ought  to  have  been  looked 
upon  as  a  sect  of  philosophers,  who,  that  they  miglit  not  give  too 
rude  a  shock  to  the  religion  and  opinions,  true  or  false,  which 
were  then  received,  did  not  choose  openly  to  avow  pure  deism, 
and  reject  formally  and  unequivocally  every  sort  of  revelation ; 
but  who  were  continually  doing,  with  respect  to  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  what  Epicurus  did  with  respect  to  the  gods;  admitting 
them  verbally  but  destroying  them  really.  In  fact,  the  Unitarians 
received  only  so  much  of  the  Scriptures  as  they  found  conformable 
to  the  natural  dictates  of  reason,  and  what  might  serve  the  purpose 
of  propping  up  and  confirming  the  systems  which  they  had  em- 
braced. .  .  .  From  Socinianism  to  deism  there  is  but  a  very 
slight  shade,  and  a  single  step  to  take :  and  the  Socinian  takes 
it."=.-  And  not  only  the  French  encyclopredists,  but  the  German 
Tationalists  looked  favourably  on  the  progress  of  Socianism  both 
i"n  our  own  country  and  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic,  as  help- 
ing them  in  their  attempt  to  extrude  from  the  Gospels  the  mira- 
culous and  supernatural  element.  But  the  reign  of  the  sensa- 
tional philosophy  having  passed,  and  the  idealistic  philosophy 
having  gained  the  ascendant,  unitarianism,  at  least,  among  many 
of  its  adherents,  has,  without  losing  any  of  its  virulence  toward 
evangelical  truth,  undergone  a  somewhat,  corresponding  change 
in  its  character.  It  has,  in  a  great  measure,  laid  aside  the  old 
rationalistic  method  of  attempting  by  forced  interpretations  to 
thrust  out  from  the  Bible  text  the  doctrines  of  redemption.  Its 
pretensions  are  philosophical  rather  than  exegetical.  It  exhibits 
Christianity  as  a  system  of  spiritual  philosophy  founded  in  the 
nature  of  things,  rather  than  a  body  of  truth  derived  from  the 
New  Testament  fairly  and  literally  interpreted.  It  does  not  so 
much  deny  that  the" evangelical  doctrines  are  there,  as  assume 
that  if  they  were  they  could  not  be  literally  true.  Accordingly, 
the  more  modern  Unitarianism  pays  less  deference  to  the  Bible, 
viewed  as  a  revelation  from  heaven,  than  even  did  the  old.  It 
heeds  far  less  what  saith  the  Sci-ipture,  than  what  says  human 
reason,  or  this  and  that  oracle  of  the  speculative  schools.  The 
chiefs  of  this  system  of  religious  philosophy  consequently  rid 
them.selves  of  many  of  the  embarrassments  which  their  predeces- 
sors had  to  encounter.     Holding  an  increasingly  lax  theory  of 

*  Dr.  Pmiili'g  Scnpfnro  TesUrr.ony,  vol.  i.  pp.  135,  133, 


02  SPIRITUALISM  ,    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

inspiration,  or  tossing  aside  the  idea  of  inspiration  altogether, 
the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  incarnation,  atonement,  and  Spirit's 
ini3uences,  become  not  so  much  a  question  of  scriptural  truth 
as  of  philosophical  possibility.  The  stubborn  texts  have  been 
abandoned,  and  the  weapons  of  transcendentalism  have  been  re- 
sorted to.  Reason  is  to  be  the  umpire  in  every  dispute.  There 
are  laT<^s  of  the  mind,  say  the  disciples  of  this  school,  which  ai-e 
exact  and  uniform.  These  are  libsolute  tests  to  man,  and  by 
means  of  them  the  pretensions  of  eveiy  doctrine  must  be  decided. 
"What  is  of  use  to  man  lies  in  the  plane  of  his  own  consciousness, 
neither  above  it  nor  below  it."*  This  is  the  motto  of  the  class 
of  writers  referred  to.  Strauss  takes  up  the  position,  "  miracles 
are  impossible;"  and,  being  pinned  there  as  lirmly  as  a  man  in 
the  stocks,  proceeds  to  examine  the  miraculous  Gospel  history. 
In  like  manner,  the  more  liberal  Unitai'ians  fix  themselves  on  the 
assumption  that  the  Trinity  and  atonement  cannot  rest  on  evidence ; 
and  then,  either  deny  that  they  are  to  be  found  in  the  Bible,  or 
finding  them  there,  discard  them  as  false  because  not  according 
with  their  own  sense  of  fitness. 

Socinianism,  then,  properly  so  called,  is  not  the  goal  in  which 
such  speculations  terminate.  Emerson,  Parker,  Blanco  White, 
F.  W.  Newman,  and  others,  have  touched  at  this  point,  but  they 
have  passed  beyond  it.  There  is  no  great  gulf,  indeed,  fixed  be- 
tween them  and  their  former  associates.  It  is  only  the  difterence 
between  men  who  seeing  clearly  whither  the  road  leads  have  shot 
along  it,  and  men  halting  dubiously  at  an  intermediate  post  yet 
looking  onward  to  the  advanced  station.  The  "  school  of  progress," 
conscious  of  a  common  linking  principle  between  itself  and  unita- 
rianism  in  all  its  shades,  is  calling  upon  it  to  come  on.  "  It  must 
do  this,  or  cease  to  represent  the  progress  of  man  in  theology.  Then 
some  other  will  take  its  oflice  ;  stand  God-parent  to  the  fair  cliild 
it  has  brought  into  the  world,  but  dares  not  own."f  Mr.  Parker, 
in  America,  has  talven  the  ofiice ;  and  Mr.  F.  W.  Newman  aspires 
to  it  in  England.  Our  amazement  is  that  such  persons  should 
still  profess  a  vague  reverence  for  Christianity,  clotlie  themselves 
so  frequently  in  the  language  of  its  ca.st-ofi*  Bible,  and  claim  the 
privilege  of  being  accounted  Christians.  "A  certain  man,"  we 
read,  "  went  down  from  Jerusalem  to  Jericho,  and  foil  among 
thieves,  wliich  stripped  him  of  his  raiment,  and  wounded  him,  and 
departed,  leaving  him  half  dead."  Had  such  depredators  turned 
again  upon  their  victim  and  professed  friendship,  it  would  have  been 
somewhat  parallel  to  the  conduct  of  many  in  our  day,  who,  while 
stabbing  Christianity  in  the  heart,  speak  of  it  as  something  divine, 

IVlr.  I'arker,  as  a  member  of  the  Unitarian  body,  grew  too  fast 
for  the  body  itself,  and  has  been  detached  from  it.     His  M^ritings 

*  Parker's  Discourse  on  Eeligion,  p.  33.  +  Ibid.  p.  3-37. 


OF    THE    BIBLE    KEDEMPTION.  93 

are  highly  appreciated  by  the  men  of  the  new  school,  and  they 
seem  not  unwilling  to  acknowledge  him  as  a  leader.     Ho  is  a  stre- 
nuous advocate  of  what  he  calls  "  absolute  religion,'  or  those  sim- 
plest elements  of  moral  and  religious  truth  which  are  supposed  to 
underlie  all  theologies,  Pagan,  Jewish,  and  Christian.     His  talk- 
on  this  point  is  not  unlike  the  rhapsodies  of  Emerson.     "  There  is 
but  one  religion,"  he  tells  us,  "  as  one  ocean."*    And  again,  "there 
can  be  but  one  kind  of  religion,  as  there  can  be  but  one  kind  of 
time  and  space."     Of  course,  the  different  names  given  to  it  indi- 
cate "  our  partial  conceptions,"  or  distinctions  belonging  ''  to  the 
thinker's  mind,  not  to  rehgion  itself  "f     Just  as  in  looking  over 
the  world,  we  see  only  one  race  of  men,  taking  the  name  of  Biitons 
or  Esquimaux,  &c.,  according  to  artificial  or  local  distinctions;  or 
just  as  it  is  one  and  the  same  element  of  water  though  parts  of  it 
be  named  the  Pacific,  the  Atlantic,  or  the  German  Ocean.     Two 
things  follow  from  this  view  which  occupy  a  prominent  place  in 
Mr.  Parker's  writings.     The  one  is,  that  "  there  no  difference  but 
of  words  between  revealed  religion  and  natural  religion. "|     All  re- 
ligions being  more  or  less  true,  and  the  essence  of  Christianity  be- 
ing made  independent  of  all  circumstances,  "  all  those  extraneous 
matters  relating  to  the  person,  character,  and  authority  of  him 
who  first  taught  it."§     The  other  is,  that  each  man  possesses  in 
his  own  mind  the  power  of  discerning  the  absolute  truth,  so  that 
everything  supposed  to  be  included  in  religion  is  to  be  tested  by 
this  intuitive  susceptibility  or  power.     "  Christianity  is  dependent 
on  no  outside  authority.  .  .  .  We  verify  its  eternal  truth  in  our 
soul."j|     He,  in  common  with  some  of  our  own  men  of  progress, 
resolves,  after  the  example  of  Schleiermacher,  the  religious  element 
in  man  into  a  sense  of  dependence.     This  religious  sentiment  or 
sense  of  dependence,  supposed  to  exist  at  the  root  of  all  religions, 
is  made  everything ;  while  the  character,  nature,  and  essence  of 
the  object  on  whicli  it  depends,  are  made  of  little  or  no  importance. 
The  objects  of  worship  are  "  accidental  circiunstances  peculiar  to 
the  age,  nation,  sect,  or  individual."     This  religious  sentiment  i.s 
the  "  eternal  element,"  all  else  is  "mutable  and  fleeting."     The 
problem  of  our  times  which  he  deems  himself  commissioned  to 
solve,  is:  "  To  separate  religion  from  whatever  is  finite, — church, 
book,  person, —  and  let  it  rest  on  its  absolute  tmth."l[  Mr.  Parker  is 
a  sort  of  Luther  in  his  own  way  :  "  Protestantism  delivers  us  from 
the  tyranny  of  the  church,  and  carries  us  back  to  the  Bible."** 
Philosophical  spiritualism  is  to  eftect  the  next  Reformation.    "  Our 
theology,"  he  says,-j-f  "  has  two  great  idols — the  Bible  and  Christ." 
And  Mr.  Parker  is  the  iconoclast  who  Avould  break  them  in  pieces. 
It  is,  after  all,  however,  but  the  exchange  of  one  infallibility  for 

*  Parker's  Discourse  on  Religion,  p.  6.  +  Ibid.  pp.  33  34. 

X  Ibid.  p.  33.  I  Ibid.  p.  183.  i|  Il)id.  p.  ?09.  IT  Ibid.  p.  37 

**  Ibid.  p.  364.  ft  Ibid.  p.  3C9. 


Gi  spiritualism;  on,  the  denial 

another — an  infallible  Bible  for  an  infallible  Self — the  outward 
for  the  inward  oracle.     There  is  an  idol  still. 

We  meet  with  strang-e  reasoning  and  a  coimfounding  of  things, 
in  "  A  Discourse  of  Matters  pertaining  to  Religion."  Thus,  in 
order  to  cut  away  the  external  evidences,  he  argues,  that  if  it  could 
be  sliown  that  Christianity  rested  on  miracles,  it  would  prove 
nothing  in  its  favour,  because  other  religions  appeal  to  the  same 
authority :  which  is  sometliing  like  saying  that  because  there  is 
a  great  deal  of  counterfeit  coin  in  the  world  there  can  be  no  genuine, 
or  because  there  are  multitudes  of  knaves  there  can  be  no  true 
men.  It  is  overlooked  that  Christ  has  "  done  the  works  that 
none  other  man  did,"  that  his  miracles,  in  their  simplicity  and 
sublimity,  in  their  power  and  benevolence,  stand  apart  from  and 
in  contrast  to  all  the  pretended  miracles  alleged  in  support  of  false 
religions. 

The  character  of  Jesus  is  a  link  in  the  chain  of  proof,  and,  in 
order  to  rend  it  asunder,  it  is  sophistically  argued,=;=  that  as  the 
truth  of  a  demonstration  in  Euclid  is  independent  of  Euclid's 
character,  so  what  is  true  in  Christianity  is  independent  of  the 
character  of  Christ.  "If  it  depends  on  Jesus,  it  is  not  eternally 
true  ...  if  not  eternally  true,  it  is  no  truth  at  all.  .  .  .  Personal 
authority  adds  nothing  to  a  mathematical  demonstration."  Now, 
in  the  first  place,  we  protest  against  the  infidel  assumption  that 
Christianity  rests  exclusively  on  this  or  that  thing  which  forms 
only  a  part  of  the  whole  ground  of  evidence.f  And,  then, 
secondly,  we  can  conceive  nothing  more  unphilosophical  than  this 
attempt  to  place  mathematical  and  moral  truth,  in  point  of  evidence, 
on  the  same  plane.  Mathematical  truth  has  no  influence  on  moral 
character;  and  the  bad  or  good  life  of  a  mathematical  teacher  does 
not  affect  the  truth  of  his  demonstrations.  But  the  chcaracter  of 
one  who  claims  to  be  a  teacher  sent  from  God,  enters  into  that 
amount  of  evidence  by  which  his  message  is  substantiated.  Com- 
mon sense  never  thinks  of  a  connection  between  a  man's  life  and 
the  truth  of  his  theorem,  but  it  does  think  of  such  a  connection 

*  Parlccr's  Discourse,  pp.  181,  19S. 

+  Out-  opponents,  with  great  unfairness,  charge  us  Avith  resorting  to  a  sophism 
when  v.e  hold  that  the  external  aiui  internal  evidences,  the  miracles  and  the 
doctiin^s  corrohorate  each  other.  This  is  well  met  by  trying  it  in  a  simple  case. 
"You  have  to  do  with  one  who  offers  to  your  eye  his  credentials  — his  diploma 
duly  signed  and  sealed,  and  which  declare  him  to  be  a  Personage  of  the  highest 
rank.  All  seems  genuine  in  these  evidences.  At  the  same  time  the  style  and 
tone,  the  air  and  behaviour,  of  this  Personage,  and  all  that  he  says,  and  what  he 
informs  you  of,  and  the  instructions  he  gives  you,  are  in  every  respect  consistent 
with  his  pretensions,  as  set  forth  in  the  Instrument  he  brings  with  him.  It  is  not, 
then,  that  you  alternately  believe  his  credentials  to  be  genuine,  because  his  de- 
portment and  his  language  arc  becoming  to  his  alleged  rank ;  and  then  that  you 
yield  to  the  imp?essioa  which  has  been  made  upon  your  feelings  by  his  deportment, 
because  you  have  admitted  the  credentials  to  be  true.  Your  belief  is  the  p»duct 
of  a  simultaneous  accordance  of  the  two  species  of  proof:  it  is  a  combined  force 
that  carries  comuction,  not  a  succession  of  proofs  in  Wne.'— The  Resioration  of 
Bdief,v.  103.. 


or    TK'E    BIBLE    REDEMPTION.  \jj 

between  moral  tnitli  and  the  character  of  him  who  reveals  it.  The 
Jews  felt  the  force  of  this,  and,  in  order  to  resist  his  doctrine,  they 
endeavom-ed  to  fasten  upon  the  Great  Teacher  tiie  charges  of  being 
a  blasphemer  and  in  league  with  Beelzebub.  Besides,  religious 
doctrines  maybe  trae  without  being  eternal  —  such  is  the  doctrine 
of  the  incarnation.  And  a  doctrine  may  be  eternal  and  yet 
historical  —  such  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  Mr.  Parker  should 
know  that  eternally  true  and  eternally  known  are  quite  different 
things.  Tt  is  a  similar  fallacy,  and  adduced  for  the  sam.e  end  — 
ridding  the  world  of  a  fixed  doctrinal  staudaixl — v/hicli  is  involved 
in  the  assertion  that  "  the  phenomena  of  religion — like  those  of 
science  and  art — must  vary  from  land  to  land,  and  age  to  age, 
v/itli  the  Tarying  civilisation  of  mankind."*  The  progress  of 
physical  truth  no  more  indicates  a  similar  progi'ess  in  religious 
ti'uth,  than  a  man's  bodily  growth  indicates  the  enlargement 
of  his  soul.  And  to  conclude  that,  as  we  have  outgrovv-n  the 
geology  of  a  past  age,  we  ought  to  outgi'ow  its  religious  belief,  is 
as  good  as  saying  that  a  people  who  have  railways  and  huge 
reflecting  telescopes,  must  be  sounder  in  the  faith  than  those  who 
ride  upon  asses  and  nexev  have  resolved  the  nebulge  in  Orion's 
belt.  "  It  may  be  shown,"  remarks  an  able  reviewer,!  "  that  while 
what  is  merely  historical  in  physics  may  be  of  small  value ;  the 
historical  in  morals  and  in  religious  faith  may  embrace  all  the 
truth  of  that  nature  the  world  will  ever  need,  and  greatly  more 
than  the  world  would  ever  have  discovered  had  it  been  left  to 
itself." 

But  the  great  fallacy  in  this  theory  of  spiritualism  —  that  which 
lies  at  the  very  core  of  the  system — consists  in  making  the  re- 
ligious principle  in  man  find  its  proper  object,  in  the  same  way 
that  the  senses — the  eye  or  the  ear — find  theii-s.  Two  things 
are  here  confounded :  the  capacity  for  receiving  religious  truth 
and  the  capacity  of  unaided  reason  to  discover  it.  "  This  theory," 
says  Mr.  Parker.j  "  teaches  that  there  is  anatm-al  supply  for  spiri- 
tual as  well  as  for  corporeal  wants;  that  there  is  a  connection 
between  God  and  the  soul,  as  between  light  and  the  eye,  sound 
and  the  ear,  food  and  the  palate,  truth  and  the  inteUect,  beauty 
and  the  imagination."  He  thus  cuts  off  the  mu-aculous  provision. 
And  then,  "  as  we  have  bodily  senses  to  lay  hold  on  matter,  and 
supply  bodily  wants,  through  which  we  obtain,  naturally,  all 
needed  material  things  ;  so  we  have  spiritual  faculties  to  lay  hold 
on  God  and  supply  spiritual  M-ants ;  through  them  we  obtain  nR 
needed  spiritual  things."  He  thus  excludes  the  supernatural  in- 
fluence which  opens  the  heai-t  to  receive  the  miraculous  supply. 
Here  is  a  point  of  fact.  —  Do  men  obtain  peace  of  conscience  and 
rest  for  the  soul,  as  naturally  as  their  eyes  obtain  light  or  their 

*  Parker's  Discourse,  p.  37.  +  British  Quai-terly,  No.  XXI. 

*  Parkers  Discourse,  p.  160. 


06  SPIRITUALISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

palate  obtains  food?     Do  the  spiritual  faculties  and  the  spiritual 
objects  come  together  in  tlie  merely  natural  way  here  represented  ? 
We  trow    not.      Universal     history  and    individual  history   dis- 
claim the  analogy.     "Each  animal,  in  its  natural  state,  attains 
its  legitimate  end,  reaches  perfection  after  its  kind."=:=     Yes.     But 
man  is  the  anomaly  here.     He  fails  of  reaching  the  perfection 
that  is  proper  to  liim.     It  is  easy  to  descant,  as  our  author  does, 
on  the  relation  of  supply  to  demand  in  the  animal  kingdom,  and 
on  tlie  sufficiency  of  instinct  in  the  ox  and  the  sparrow.     But  to 
conclude  that  because  the  natural  circumstances  attending  them 
are  perfect,  it  must  be  so  in  the  case  of  man ;  that  because  they 
obtain  rest  and  satisfaction  in  a  natural  and  not  miraculous  sup- 
ply, by  a  natural  and  not  su])ernatural  guide,  therefore  the  human 
race  needs   no  miraculous  provision  and  no  other  than  natural 
gniidance ;  is  as  consistent  with  fact  as  to  infer  that  since  the  fowls 
of  the  air  fly,  man  must  have  wings.    It  is  true  that  we  find  a  race  of 
men,  though  "  we  never  find  a  race  of  animals,  destitute  of  what  is 
most  needed  for  them,  wandering  up  and  down  seeking  rest  and  find- 
ing none."f     That  capacity  implies  the  object,  and  that  there  are 
supplies  to  meet  the  spiritual  wants  of  man  are  truths.     But  the 
fact,  however  mysterious,  in  reference  to  man,  is,  that  the  capacity 
and  the  object  do  not,  as  in  the  irrational  animals,  come  naturally 
together.    '  There  is  no  discrepancy  between  the  proper  destiny 
and  the  actual  condition  of  the  sparrow,  but  there  is  much  between 
the  proper  destiny  and  the  actual  condition  of  man.     A  sense  of 
guilt  is  a  real  and  powerful  element  in  man's  religious  conscious- 
ness which  this  theory  of  spiritualism  ignores,  and  for  which,  con- 
sequently, it  makes  no  provision.     That  sense  of  guilt  is  a  fact  in 
the  natural  history  of  man,  which  remains  in  spite  of  all  such 
teaching,  and  to  talk,  amid  this  felt  discordance  between  actual 
condition  and  proper  destiny,  of  throwing  man  npon  himself  or 
npon  the  religious  sentiment  at  the  bottom  of  his  heart,  is  some- 
thing like  bidding  a  man  brood  over  his  disease  when  he  feels  tlie 
need  of  going  out  after  a  remedy.     Mr.  Parker  tells  us  that  "  for 
the  religious   consciousness  of  man,  a  knowledge  of  two  great 
tniths  is  indispensable ;  namely,  a  knowledge  of  the  existence  of 
the  Infinite  God,  and  of  the  duty  we  owe  to  Him."]:     These,  of 
coarse,  may  be  known,  independently  of  all  revelation  and  super- 
natural influence,  by  intuition  and  reflection.     Now  supposing 
that  man  needed  no  more  than  this  knowledge,  it  is  asked,  does 
his  own  unaided  intuition  furnish  it,  or  is  he  found  in  tliis  state 
of  nature  discharging  his  duty?     Let  the  world's  history,  actual 
observation,  and  personal  experience  answer.      Our  question  t^- 
answered  wlien  we  think  of  "many  a  swarthy  Indian,  who  bowed 
down  to  wood  and  stone — many  a  grim-faced  Calmuck,  who  wor- 
shipped the  great  God  of  Storms — many  a  Grecian  peasant,  who 

*  rarker'a  Discoiuse,  p.  136.  +  Ibi.l.  *  Ibid.  p.  158. 


OF    THE    BIBLE    BEDEIMI TIOK.  07 

(lid  hooy^e  to  Phoebiis-Apolio  when  the  sun  rose  or  went  dow]i 
—  many  a  savage,  his  hands  smeared  all  over  with  human  sacrifice," 
although  Mr.  Parker  assures  us,  in  his  catholicity,  that  they  shall 
sit  down  witli  Moses  and  Jesus  in  the  kingdom  of  God."::=  But 
much  more  than  this  knowledge  is  wanting.  Men  who  have  it 
are  wandering  up  and  dov/n  seeking  rest  and  finding  none ;  they 
know  that  the  infinite  God  exists,  hut  they  want  to  know  how  He 
can  pardon  guilt  and  justify  the  ungodly;  they  know  theii'  duty, 
but  there  is  the  want  of  inclination  or  moral  power  to  act  up  to  it. 
And,  —  amid  all  this  fine  talk  about  the  light  of  nature,  world-wide 
inspiration,  and  the  power  of  intuitive  sentiment,  —  the  actual 
condition  of  the  race,  without  the  external  teaching  of  Christianity, 
rises  up  in  dark  contrast,  and  forces  from  us  the  exclamation, 
Has  this  intuitive  power  given  to  the  soul  its  proper  object,  as 
instinct  has  given  to  the  beast  and  bird  theirs "? 

It  will  be  seen,  then,  what  is  the  attitude  taken  by  this  system 
of  spiritualism  towards  the  Christian  revelation.  "  It  bows  to  no 
idols,  neither  the  church,  nor  the  Bible,  nor  yet  Jesus,  but  God 

only Its  redeemer   is   within  —  its  salvation  williin;   its 

heaven  and  its  oracle  of  God."f  The  intuitive  susceptibility  or 
power  of  the  mind  is  placed  on  the  judgment  seat,  and  made  the 
sovereign  determinator  of  what  is  truth  oi-  the  "absolute  religion." 
The  Bible,  irrespective  altogether  of  its  evidences,  is  stripped  of 
its  authority  as  the  law  and  the  testimony,  and  is  received  as  a 
help  only  in  the  degree  that  its  utterances  accord  with  the  senti- 
ment of  the  mind.  The  claims  of  Christianity  are  settled,  not  on 
the  ground  of  its  grand  divine  peculiarities,  but  in  proportion  a& 
its  statements  are  found  to  contain  the  simple  unchanging  prin- 
ciples of  the  religion  called  absolute.  It  "  sponges  out  nine-tenths 
of  the  whole;  or,  after  reducing  the  mass  of  it  to  a  caput  mortuum 
of  lies,  fiction,  and  superstitions,  retains  only  a  few  drops  of  fact 
and  doctrine,  —  so  few  as  certainly  not  to  pay  for  the  expenses  of 
the  critical  distillation. "|  Christianity,  or  what  is  generally  under  • 
stood  to  be  its  distinguishing  principles,  is,  of  course,  well  black 
ened  and  grossly  misrepresented,  in  order  to  insiu'e  its  condemna- 
tion. Spiritualism,  we  are  told,  "calls  God  father,  not  king;" 
whereas  popular  Christianity  "makes  God  dark  and  awful;  a 
iudge,  not  a  protector;  a  king,  not  a  father  :  jealous,  selfish,  vin- 
dictive. He  is  the  Draco  of  the  universe;  the  author  of  sin,  but 
its  unforgiving  avenger."§  This  we  can  characterise  only  as  a 
great  untruth,  and  we  cannot  help  thinking,  that  Mr.  Parker 
knew  it.  The  design  is  to  array  man's  moral  nature  against  the 
external  divine  revelation,  and  to  represent  the  doctrines  of  atone- 
ment  as  conflicting  witli  the  imperishable  religious  sentiments 

*  Parker's  Discourse,  p.  83.  +  Ibirl.  p.  30]. 

t  Picgers's  Essays  from  the  Edinburgh  Review,  vol.  ii.  p.  330. 

i  Parkers  Discourse,  pp.  342,  3o'J 


98  spiritualism;  or,  the  denial 

comiiion  to  the  race.  But,  as  we  shall  afterwards  show,eepiritiial- 
isra  is  as  much  at  variance  with  analogy  in  calling  God  father  and 
refusing  to  call  Him  also  king,  as  it  is  dishonest  in  making  evan- 
gelism call  Him  king  only  and  not  father  also. 

Mr.  Parker,  like  many  others,  would  shift  the  contest  from  the 
field  of  the  external  evidences,  (hy  affecting  to  despise  them  as, 
even  if  true,  of  no  value,)  to  the  matter  of  Christianity  itself;  the 
intuitive  susceptihility  or  power  of  the  mind  heing  supreme  arbiter. 
"\Ye,  without  abating  a  jot  of  our  regard  for  these  evidences — 
being  more  and  more  disposed  to  tell  these  towers  and  mark  these 
bulwarks  —  are  willing  to  abide  by  a  fair  trial  of  the  contents  of 
the  revelation  itself.  It  is  part  of  the  disingenuousness  of  infi- 
delity, to  represent  us  as  fixed  on  the  one  ground,  and  reluctant  to 
do  battle  on  the  other.  The  nature  of  the  doctrine  must  be  taken 
into  account,  as  well  as  the  external  evidence  v/hich  attests  it. 
But  we  demur  to  making  any  inward  power  of  depraved  man,  be 
it  called  intuition  or  religious  sentiment,  a  sufficient  guide  or  test 
in  sucli  a  question  as  this.  It  is  enough  that  our  moral  natm'e, 
in  its  clear  imperishable  utterances,  be  not  overborne  or  brought 
into  collision.  But  it  is  not  entitled  to  demand  that  it  should  be 
made  the  revaaler  of  truth,  or  that  an  external  revelation  should 
disclose  nothing  but  what  lies  within  the  range  of  our  natural 
faculties,  for  that  were  to  deny  the  possibility  of  a  revelation 
properly  so  called.  This,  however,  is  the  high  claim  of  modern 
spiritualism.  Common  sense  refuses  to  yield  to  any  such  intole- 
rable dogmatism.  It  is  inconsistent  with  om-  dependent  condition 
in  this  world,  and  vdth  the  felt  wants  of  the  human  spirit.  We 
are  led  to  look  for  a  revelation  from  without,  and  if  attested  by 
sufficient  evidence,  if  its  documents  be  proved  genuine,  and  if  its 
contents,  though  above  the  power  of  our  moral  nature  to  discover, 
be  in  harmony  with  its  broad  principles  and  with  what  we  other- 
wise know  of  the  Divine  government,  nothing  on  oiu*  part  should 
hinder  its  reception.  It  is  the  alleged  discordancy  between  the 
two  that  nins  throughout  the  whole  of  Mr.  Parker's  illogical  and 
intolerant  book,  and  which  is  the  sharp  sword  in  the  hands  of 
philosophical  spiritualism.  But,  let  us  hear  another  chief  of  the 
game  school,  before  we  turn  the  weapon. 

"  Modern  spiritualism  has  reason  to  be  deeply  grateful  to  Mr. 
Nevrman."  So  says  a  London  journal-  that  numbers  among  its 
contributors  men  of  like  stamp.  He  seems  to  have  done  great 
things  for  them  whereof  they  are  glad.  His  recent  work,  "  Phases 
of  Faith ;  or.  Passages  from  the  History  of  my  Creed,"  is  looked 
upon  as  having  thrown  up  a  highway  on  which  the  "new  re- 
formation" may  safely  advance.  People,  in  certain  regions,  are 
tliankful  for  what  in  other  places  would  be  counted  but  very  bad 

*  The  Leader. 


OF    THii.    ElBLE    EEDEJIPTION.  99 

roads.  And  surely  the  pathways  of  spiritualism  must  have  been 
loose  and  insecure  that  it  needed  Mr.  Newman's  work  to  tread  on, 
and  for  which  it  is  so  grateful.  "NVe  willingly  accord  to  this  book 
the  j)raise  of  a  simple  and  good  English  style ;  but  we  deny  it 
the  merit  of  cleverly  sustaining  the  part  of  honesty  which  it 
assumes.  There  is  reason  to  suspect  that  a  man  has  not  overmuch 
of  this  virtue,  when,  at  the  end  of  every  paragraph  in  his  speech, 
he  is  making  loud  professions  of  it.  Mr.  Newman  becomes  an 
unbeliever,  and  then  he  writes  a  book  to  tell  us  that  he  could  not 
help  it.  He  would  have  us  to  look  upon  him,  in  passing  through 
these  "  phases,"  as  a  man  whose  sympathies  were  mainly  in  favour 
of  the  old  doctrines,  but  who,  under  a  strong  sense  of  duty,  had  to 
sacrifice  them  and  suffer  loss.  And  these  professions,  be  it  ob- 
served, are  not  unfrequently  made  after  grossly  perverting  Scrip- 
ture, or  misrepresenting  the  evangelical  creed.  He  "  struggled  to 
the  last,  to  rest  on  the  practical  soundness  of  Paul's  eminently 
sober  understanding.  .  .  But  Paul  also  proved  a  broken  reed  "* 
And  why?  Because,  in  his  treatment  of  the  gift  of  tongues,  he 
speaks,  according  to  Mr.  Newman,  like  an  Irvingite ;  and  because 
the  Christ  of  Paul's  cjDistles  is  a  diiierent  being  from  the  Christ  of 
the  evangelists  !  Again,  he  tells  us  that  the  53rd  chapter  of  Isaiah 
and  some  of  the  other  Messianic  prophecies  "  were  the  very  last 
link  of  his  chain  that  snapt."  After  severe  tugging,  ''  it  still  re- 
mained strange  that  tliere  should  be  coincidences  so  close  with  the 
sufferings  of  Jesus  :  but  he  reflected  that  he  had  no  proof  that  the 
narrative  had  not  been  strained  by  credulity.  .  .  .  And  herewith 
(lie  adds)  my  last  argument  in  favour  of  views  for  which  I  once 
would  have  laid  down  my  life,  seemed  to  be  spent."f  We  are  thus 
to  judge  of  the  way  in  which  he  has  made  such  mighty  sacrifices. 
And  our  conclusion  is,  that  Mr.  Newman's  statements  must  be 
taken  with  some  qualification,  v\-hen  he  assm-es  us  of  beiiig  forced, 
against  all  his  prepossessions,  to  yield  to  the  authority  of  Strauss : 
or,  of  being  thrown  every  now  and  then  into  great  disquietude, 
because  Iris  "  moral  sentiment  and  the  Scripture  v.'cre  no  longer  in 
full  har]nony."J 

The  impression  made  on  most  minds  in  reading  the  "  Phases," 
we  are  persuaded,  will  be  that  its  author  never  was,  in  the  proper 
sense  of  the  expression,  a  Christian.  Indeed,  his  ignorance  or 
perversion  of  Christian  doctrines  and  evidences  is  manifested  in 
almost  every  page.  He  divides  the  progress  of  his  creed  into  a 
number  of  periods.  In  the  first  period,  or  what  he  calls  his 
"  youthful  creed,"  we  have  the  picture  of  a  young  man  sent  to 
Oxford  without  armour,  and  wounded  by  all  the  little  fighters 
that  surround  him.  "VYe  may  sympathise  with  his  detestation  of 
formalism  and  of  priestly  assumptions.     But  he  lacks  judgment 

*  rhases  of  Faith,  p.  177.  +  Ibid.  p.  197  i  Ibid.  p.  81. 

H    Z 


100  SPIRITUALISM  ;    OR,    THE    DKNIAL 

to  discern  the  tliinors  tliat  differ.  In  the  second  period,  or  "  striv- 
ings after  a  more  Primitive  Christianity,"  he  occupies  the  position 
of  a  man  in  open  conflict  with  other  men's  opinions,  and  yet  cha- 
grined that  they  do  not  hug  and  emhrace  him.  He  is  caught  and  ■ 
tossed  ahout  hy  every  wind.  He  throws  aside  the  leading  Chris- 
tian doctrines  as  intellectual  propositions  or  dogmas,  while  pre- 
tending much  reverence  for  Scripture.  In  tlie  third  period,  his 
religion  has  assumed  the  shape  of  moral  sentiment,  (''  if  shape  it 
miglit  he  called,  that  shape  had  none,")  which  is  independent  of 
our  belief  in  the  Bible.  The  inward  power  of  judging  is  here 
made  everything.  He  touches  at  Unitarianism,  but  it  cannot 
afford  him  "  half  an  hour's  resting  place."=:=  And  befoTe  this  in- 
ward power  "  whether  called  common  sense,  conscience,  or  the 
Spirit  of  God,"f  he  brings,  after  having  in  a  great  measure  per- 
verted them,  the  doctrines  of  depravity  and  the  fall,  election  and 
future  punishment,  the  atonement  and  divinity  of  Clu'ist,  and 
having  surrendered  them,  indorses  them  "  Calvinism  Abandoned." 
And  yet  he  would  have  us  believe  that  in  all  the  workings  of  his 
mind  about  these  doctrines,  they  had  little  to  do  with  the  inward 
exercises  of  his  soul  towards  God.  "He  was  still  the  same,  im- 
mutably glorious  :  not  one  feature  of  his  countenance  bad  altered 
to  my  gaze  or  could  alter."|  Surely,  then,  a  dishonest  man  might 
say,  "after  his  worlv  of  plunder,  what  has  this  to  do  v/itb  my  in- 
tegrity? The  fourth  period,  or  "the  religion  of  the  letter  re- 
noimced,"  represents  him  afloat  far  from  laud.  He  lays  hold  of  all 
the  old  objections  to  the  Bible,  grounded  for  the  inostpart  on  such 
things  as  wrong  dates  and  names,  most  of  which  have  been  refuted 
a  thousand  times.  He  would  have  us  infer,  that  as  John  and  Paul 
did  not  understand  astronomy  so  well  as  Sir  W.  Herschell,  that  as 
their  science  as  men  might  be  at  fault,  so  might  their  teaching  as 
inspired  apostles. §  It  is  in  vain  to  tell  JNIr.  Newman,  it  is  not  in 
their  character  as  men,  but  in  their  peculiar  character  as  apostles, 
that  we  claim  for  them  inspiration  and  infallibility;  —  that  as  they 
were  not  commissioned  to  teach  human  science,  they  might  have 
been  wrong  in  astronomy ;  but  that  as  they  were  commissioned 
and  inspired  to  teach  Christian  truth,  they  could  not  have  been 
wrong  in  theology.  He  has  here  reduced  the  Bible  to  almost 
nothing,  being  greatly  aided,  he  confesses, I|  by  some  German! 
divines,  especially  by  Be  ^^'ette,  and  yet  he  professes  to  hold  by 
Christianity.  He  would  liave  us  to  imagine  him  "resting  under 
an  Indian  iig-tree,  which  is  supported  by  certain  grand  stems,  but 
also  lets  down  to  the  earth  many  small  branches,  wliich  seem  to 
the  eye  to  prop  the  tree,  but  in  fact  are  supported  by  it.  If  they 
were  cut  away,  the  tree  would  not  be  less  strong.  So  neither  was 
the  tree  of  Christianity  weakened  by  the  loss  of  its  apparent  props. 

*  riiases  of  Faitli,  p.  101.  ^  Ibid.  p.  8-2.  t  Ibid.  p.  104. 

i  Ibid.  p.  J 21  II  Ibid.  p.  108. 


OF   THE    BlBLi:    REDEMri'ION,  101. 

I  might  still  enjoy  its  shade,  and  eat  of  its  fruits,  and  bless  the 
hand  that  planted  it."-  This  may  seem  beautiful,  but  it  is  not 
true.  The  tree,  in  so  far  as  Mr.  Newman  is  concerned,  has  dis- 
appeared with  all  its  props  and  stems.  And  that  under  whicli  he 
is  sitting  is  as  like  the  tree  of  Christianity  as  the  bramble  bush 
is  like  the  oak.  In  renouncing  the  letter  he  has  renounced  the 
spirit.  And  the  flagrancy  is,  after  having  openly  done  the  deed, 
to  vaunt  of  his  innocence.  In  the  fifth  period,  or  "  faith  at  second- 
hand found  to  be  vain,"  he  has  reached  the  position  that  miracles 
cannot  be  admitted  as  evidence  of  moral  truth.  He  does  not 
attempt  so  much  to  deny  the  miracles  as  to  depreciate  them.  The 
assertion  on  which  he  lays  stress  is,  "  that  miraculous  phe- 
nomena will  never  prove  the  goodness  and  veracity  of  God,  if  we 
do  not  know  these  qualities  in  Him  witliout  miracle. "f  Granted: 
but  this  does  not  preclude  miracle  attesting  a  special  manifestation 
of  tlie  Divine  goodness.  That  God  is  good,  is  indeed  a  trutli 
'•discernible  by  the  heart  without  the  aid  of  miracle;"  but  that 
He  would  manifest  his  goodness  in  the  way  implied  in  the  Chris- 
tian redemption  is  not  so  discernible.  And  though  such  a  mani- 
festation, after  it  has  been  made,  may  answer  the  yearnings  of  the 
heart,  yet  the  want  of  special  evidence  to  attest  the  special  and 
extraordinary  interposition  is  felt.  Mr.  Newman  and  his  scliool 
can  never  make  good  the  proposition  that  moral  truth  cannot  be 
substantiated  by  miracles  of  sense.  Ixlen  are  so  constituted  as  to 
associate  (unless  wilfully  blinded  by  prejudice)  the  truthfulness  of 
the  moral  teaching  with  the  tmdoubted  manifestations  of  mi- 
raculous power  on  the  part  of  the  teacher.  And  wdiat  he  does  to 
weaken  or  nullify  them,  is  to  represent  Jesus  as  "  solely  anxiou.-5 
to  have  people  believe  in  Him,  without  caring  on  what  grounds 
they  believed;"]:  to  represent  the  logical  notions  of  the  apostles  as 
at  variance  with  oiu's,  and  to  speak  of  our  moral  judgments  as  at 
conflict  with  the  Gospel  and  its  evidences.§  Did  he  never  read  the 
Scripture,  how  that  Christ,  resting  his  claims  on  his  miracles,  said, 
"The  works  that  I  do  in  my  Father's  name,  they  bear  witness  of 
me.  .If  I  do  not  the  works  of  my  Father,  believe  mo  not.  But 
if  I  do,  though  ye  believe  not  me,  believe  the  works;  that  ye  may 
know  and  believe,  that  the  Father  is  in  me  and  I  in  him? "  And 
when  he  assumes,  that  because  the  astronomy  of  Paid's  day  was 
defective,  so  was  the  logic;  or  asserts,||  that  because  we  cannot 
cross-examine  the  ajjostles,  we  have  no  means  of  assuring  ourselves 
that  they  held  correct  principles  of  evidence,  we  tell  him  that 
though  men  may  have  different  data  in  different  ages,  it  by  no 
means  follows  that  they  must  have  different  principles  of  reason- 
ing; and  we  ask  if  he  is  prepared  to  set  aside  all  but  contempor- 
aneous history,  to  place  no  confidence  in  Thucydides  or  Josephus, 

*  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  113.  +  Ibid.  p.  107.  t  Ibid.  p.  116.  i  Ibid.  p.  147. 

II  loid.  p.  HR 


102  spiritualism;  or,  the  denial 

■because  he  cannot  interrogate  them  ?  And  then  he  assumes,  what 
never  has  happened,  and  never  can  happen,  the  existence  of  a 
miracle  that  would  authorize  him  to  violate  his  moral  perceptions. 
It  is,  we  repeat,  a  disingenuous  resort  of  infidelity,  to  separate  two 
things  which  God  hath  joined  together — the  character  of  the  doc- 
trine and  the  character  of  the  external  evidence  attesting  it — and 
to  represent  us  as  resting  on  the  latter,  exclusive  of  the  former, 
whereas  the  faith  of  the  Christian  has  regard  to  hoth.  In  the 
sixth  phase  of  Mr.  Newman's  faith,  he  attempts  to  cut  up  histori- 
cal religion  hy  the  roots,  and  represents  religion  as  a  state  of  sen- 
timent toward  God  that  is  independent  of  any  outward  creed 
v.'hatever.  He  assumes  that  because  wo  contend  for  an  historical 
foundation  to-  Christianity,  we  make  it  a  mere  problem  of  litera- 
ture ;  and  then  argues,*  that  as  he  cannot  solve  literary  problems 
concerning  distant  history,  and  as  they  lie  beyond  "  the  rehgious 
faculties  of  the  poor  and  half-educated,"  they  can  form  no  part 
of  religion.  Here  is  obviously  a  confounding  of  two  dififerent 
things  :  the  mind's  susceptibility  of  religious  sentiment,  and  the 
outward  law  and  testimony  which  appeals  authoritatively  to  that 
susceptibility.  And,  to  use  the  words  of  Dr.  Vaughan.f  we  ask 
"  what  means  this  constant  insinuation,  that  historical  evidence 
must  be  wholly  without  value  to  m^en  not  learned  in  history  ?  Is 
it  not  manifestly  the  sentiment  of  our  nature — a  sentiment^  so 
common  and  rooted  as  to  seem  to  be  instinctive,  that  there  is  a 
credibility  in  historical  testimony,  even  as  relating  to  the  mass  of 
mankind^!  sufficient  to  bring  the  remote  past  into  a  certain  and 
living  connection  with  the  present.  Not  only  is  it  a  fact,  that  the 
least  learned  are  influenced  by  historical  testimony  as  truly,  if  not 
as  immediately,  as  the  most  learned,  but  it  is  manifestly  a  law  of 
Providence  that  it  should  be  so ;  and  it  remains  to  be  sho^vn  why 
the  law  which  embraces  testimony  to  this  effect  concerning  Crom- 
well or  Alfred,  should  not  embrace  testimony  to  the  same  effect 
concerning  Paul  and  Esaias."  Mr.  Newman,  referring  we  presume 
to  some  of  the  difficulties  connected  with  this  subject,^  says,|  '_'  II 
I  have  been  seven  years  labouring  in  vain  to  solve  this  vast  lite- 
rary problem,  it  is  "an  extreme  absurdity  to  imagine  that  the  sol- 
ving of  it  is  imposed  by  God  on  the  whole  human  race."  Now, 
let  him  spend  seven  times  seven  years  in  labouring  to  solve  some 
of  the  problems  that  lie  before  him  in  the  domain  of  natural  reli- 
o-ion,  —  for  example,  the  problem  of  moral  evil — and  what  will  he 
niake  out?  Nevertheless,  God  certainly  lias  not  imposed  the  so- 
lution upon  him  or  upon  any  of  the  race. 

But  Mr.  Newman's  drift  is  to  get  rid  of  an  historical  Christ.  He 
insinuates  that  Jesus  was  far  from  perfect — that  his  portrait  as 
drawn  by  the  evangelists  is  in  a  great  measure  imaginary  — and, 

*  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  ICO. 
+  Dr.  YansliaiV.g  Letter  and  Spirit,  p.  04.  i  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  199 


OF    THE    UIBLE    IIEDEMPTION.  103 

if  asked  to  specify  the  faults  in  that  matchless  character,  he  main- 
tains that  he  is  not  boimcl  to  do  so  because  this  were  presuming 
Him  to  be  perfect  until  we  find  him  to  be  imperfect.*  Yes.  If  a  man 
is  generally  reported  to  be  honest  and  claims  to  be  accounted  so, 
you,  if  you  deny  it,  are  obliged  to  establish  the  charge  of  dishonesty. 
It  is  generally  acknowledged  that  every  mere  man  is  imperfect  — 
every  sane  mind  admits  it.  The  onus  jjy  oh  audi,  therefore,  lies  on 
him  who  denies  it.  So  with  the  man  who  denies  the  sinless 
character  of  Jesus,  We  meet  with  another  strange  thing  here. 
Mr.  Newman  represents!  it  as  moral  suicide  to  sit  in  judgment  on 
the  claims  of  Jesus  and  then  to  submit  our  judgment  to  his  autho 
rity,  first  to  criticise  and  then  to  cease  our  criticism,  first  to  exer 
cise  free  thought  and  then  to  abandon  it.  We  say,  that  to  yieic 
the  mind  up  to  Cluist,  after  having  been  convinced  of  the  divinity ' 
of  his  claims,  is  alone  worthy  of  the  name  of  free  thought.  Anc 
we  ask,  do  you  act  thus  in  common  life — in  selecting  a  friend,  for 
example?  You  criticise  at  first.  Do  you  goon  with  your  criticism? 
Mr.  Ne\vman  would  have  us  believe  that  it  is  with  jDain  he  gives 
up  "  sentiments  tov/ards  an  historical  person,  v/hieh  have  been 
tenderly  cherished  as  a  religion. ":|:  But,  with  his  book  before  us, 
we  refuse  to  do  so. 

In  concluding  the  "  Phases,"  he  deems  himself  warranted, 
fii-om  his  previous  "  passages,"  to  consider  it  as  a  settled  point  that 
the  external  revelation  is  in  colHsion  with  the  moral  sentiments. 
We  have  here  Spiiitualism  versus  Clmstianity.  "  If  the  spirit 
within  us,"  says  he,  "  and  the  Bible  (or  Church)  without  us  are 
at  variance,  we  must  either  follow  the  inward  and  disregard  the  out- 
ward law ;  else  we  must  renounce  the  inward  law  and  ohejj  the 
outward."^  Matters  have  been  brought  to  no  such  pass.  The 
child  has  not  received  "  discordant  commands"  from  his  father 
and  mother,  and  is  not  reduced  to  "  the  painful  necessity  of  disobey- 
ing one  in  order  to  obey  the  other."  Mr.  Newman,  throughout 
his  book,  has  given  such  representations  of  the  atonement  and 
the  doctrines  connected  with  it,  not  to  speak  of  the  old-refuted 
objections  which  he  brings  against  many  parts  of  the  sacred 
record,  as  to  remind  us  of  the  coarseness  and  unfairness  of 
the  school  of  Paine.  He  has  first  perverted  the  outward  law,  ana 
then  set  over  against  it  the  inward.  Pie  has  exalted  the  one  to 
the  judgment  seat,  and  then  brings  the  other,  blackened  and  de- 
formed, before  it,  to  be  condemned.  And  what,  after  all,  does  he 
mean  by  "the  spirit  witliin  us,"  but  individual  feeling?  One 
man's  spiritualism  may  differ  widely  from  another  man's.  Judging 
from  some  recent  manifestations,  the  inward  oracle  is  far  from 
being  harmonious  in  its  utterances.  "  The  authoritative  unity, 
claimed  for  it,  is  a  fiction.     Newman's  Personal  Spiritualism,  in 

*  Phases  of  Faith,  pp.  210  210. 
+  ibiJ.  p.  210.  i  Ibid.  p.  £'14.  '  2  Ibid.  pp.  227, 228. 


lf]4  spiniTUALisM ;  on,  the  denial 

l^lace  of  beino;-  a  centre  of  rest,  must  be  a  perpetual  Lattle-iield 
between  the  claims  of  feeling  and  the  claims  of  the  understanding.'^^ 
And  then  what  wilful  blindness  to,  or  ungrateful  reading  of,  the 
world's  history,  to  speak  of  the  world'sreligious  progress  as  having 
b3en  intercepted  or  turned  back  by  the  claim  of  Messiahshipfor 
Jesus.  And  what  a  miserable  delusion  to  anticipate,  that  if  the 
world  was  swept  clear  of  intellectual  creeds  and  an  historical 
Christianity,  and  men  were  thrown  on  their  own  inward  sentiments, 
liaving  no  doctrine  in  common  but  the  vague  thing  called  "  God's 
sympathy  with  individual  man,"  the  race  would  move  steadily 
onward  If  But  for  th.e  historical  Christianity  which  he  contemns, 
Mr.  Newman's  religion,  most  assuredly,  would  not  have  differed 
in  the  degree  that  it  does,  from  the  religion  of  the  Greek  and 
Eoman  philosophers.  The  "  progress"  would  not  have  been  quite 
so  "  spiritual." 

^,lr.  Mackay's  "  Progress  of  the  Intellect,"  though  differing  in 
many  respects  from  Newman's  "Phases"  and  Parker's  "Discourse," 
is  a  production  of  tbe  same  school,  and  assumes  a  like  hostile 
attitude  towards  the  doctrines  of  the  Christian  redemption.  These 
doctrines,  with  him,  are  "  a  petty  sanctuary  of  borrowed  beliefs." 
And  he  has  much  more  admiration  for  the  times  when  men  saw 
"  serious  meaning  in  the  golden  napkin  of  lihampsinitus,  nay 
even  in  the  gush  of  water  from  the  jaw-bone  of  Samson's  ass,"  than 
for  our  age  with  its  doctrinal  articles  and  creeds.;]:  A  floating, 
ever-changing  sanctuary  of  faith  is,  in  bis  view,  more  beautiful 
than  a  fixed  one.  If  the  Bible  would  only  submit  to  be  regarded 
as  a  jsart  of  this  shifting  cloud-land,  one  of  the  many  phases  of 
our  ideal  creations,  it  would,  like  the  other  "  jilayful  mythi,"  be 
attractive  to  Mr.  Mackay  and  his  school ;  but  it  cannot  be  tolerated 
in  its  claim  to  be  the  law  and  the  testimony.  T)ie  ancients,  with 
their  mytiiical  legends,  "were  as  the  eagle  intently  gazing  on  what 
be  wants  strength  to  reach ;"  we,  with  oin-  Bible  creeds,  "  are  the 
owls  blinking  at  thc*first  dayliglit,  which,  however,  we  are  slowly 
learning  to  support. "§ 

Our  author  places  the  polytheistic  systems  of  tiie  Greeks  and  the 
Jewish  and  Clu-istian  Scriptures  on  the  same  plane,  both,  ac- 
cording to  him,  being  the  mind's  own  weaving,  the  results  of 
investing  the  inward  conceptions  with  an  outward  and  divine 
authoritv.  He  assumes  that  all  religion  is  a  form  of  symbolism  ; 
Christianity  and  material  idolatry  being  in  this  respect  on  the 
same  level,  only  the  one  is  deemed  a  higher  product  of  the 
intellectual  law  of  development  than  the  other.  Like  Mr.  Parker 
and  his  fellow  disciples,  he  holds  that  Christianity  has  two  aspects. 
The  first  is  "  the  moral  conception,  which,  as  eternally  good  and 
true,  is  not  so  much   its  own  peculiarity  as  an  essential  part  of  all 

*  Britisla  Quailerly,  No.  XXIII.  +  Phases  of  Faith,  pp.  225,  2.34. 

%  The  Progress  of  the  lut'-llect,  vol.  i.  p.  7.  2  Ibii.  vol.  i.  p.  12. 


OF    THE    IJIBLE    REDEMPTION.  105 

civilisation."  And  secondly,  its  "  special  dogmas  and  forms,"  such 
us  the  atonement  and  Spirit's  influences,  "  which  making  up  its 
accidental  expression  or  clothing,  have  never  ceased  to  accompany 
its  development,  though  often  threatening  to  ohscure  or  supersede 
the  vital  meaning  connected  with  them."=:'  This  is  something  like 
taking  a  man's  soul  for  his  clothes,  or  depriving  him  of  reason  and 
intelligence  in  order  to  reduce  him  to  the  mere  animal.  Mr. 
Mackay,  in  short,  like  his  fellow  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic, 
is  a  resolute  disciple  of  what  is  called  "  absolute  religion" — "an 
eternal,  never-failing  jirinciple,"  of  which  all  religious  symbols  or 
dogmas  are  but  the  temporary  livery.f  By  this  eternal  inde 
structible  principle,  we  are  to  understand  some  such  vague  thing 
as  a  sense  of  dependence,  or  a  feeling  of  Divine  sympathy,  which, 
as  an  ultimate  fact,  is  supposed  to  underlie  all  tlie  religions  that 
the  world  ever  saw,  —  a  sort  of  universal  soul  pervading  all  systems, 
Pagan,  Hebrew,  and  Christian,  —  a  kind  of  pantheistic  element,  to 
which  all  "  ai'tificial  forms  of  ritual  or  creed"  bear  the  same 
temporary  relation  that  the  leaves  of  the  forest,  or  the  gTass  of  the 
field,  bear  to  tlie  principle  of  life  that  pervades  the  universe.  Mr. 
Mackay  would,  without  scruple,  indorse  Mr.  Parker's  statement 
— '•  there  is  but  one  religion,  as  one  ocean  ;  though  Ave  call  it  faith 
in  our  cliurch,  and  infidelity  out  of  our  church.";]:  And  he  would 
shake  hands  with  brother  Newman  in  affirming  —  "religion  was 
created  by  the  inward  instincts  of  the  soul :  it  had  afterwards  to  be 
pruned  and  chastened  by  the  sceptical  understanding."§ 

The  pruning  and  chastening  process  goes  on  ;  and  Mr.  Mackay 
is  resolved,  in  relation  to  Christianity,  that  spare  the  knife  wlio 
will,  he  will  not.  The  Bible  doctrines  of  the  fall  of  man,  atone- 
ment by  Christ,  and  regeneration  through  the  Spirit,  are,  according 
to  his  theory,  excrescences  threatening  to  obscure  or  supersede  tbe 
vital  element,  and  he  lops  them  off.  The  work,  of  course,  required 
no  little  daring,  and  something  very  different  from  shamefacedness. 
It  did  not  consist  with  the  humility  professed  in  the  first  sentence 
of  his  preface.  And,  accorchugly,  Mr.  Mackay,  on  entering  tlie 
temple,  instead  of  leaving  his  shoes  after  the  Eastern  manner,  at 
the  door,  left  his  humility.||  And  then  the  fall  and  the  atonement, 
not  denied  to  be  in  th,8  13ible,  are  dismissed  as  mere  "  tricks  of 
fancy,"  "  ancient  superstitions,"  "  subjective  facts  in  the  writer's 
miud,"  in  short,  only  a  projection  of  the  inward  consciousness  into 
the  outward  world.  1[ 

Dr.  Strauss,  in  dealing  with  the  evangelical  histories,  has  been 
spoken  of  as  without  an  equal  in  the  nil  admirari  vein.  But  wo 
warrant  our  author,  in  his  manner  of  treating  Jesus  and  Paul,  to 
match  him.     He  admits  that  there  existed  the  notion  of  atonement 

*  The  Progress  of  the  Intellect,  vol.  ii.  p.  393.  +  Ibid.  vol.  i.  p.  17. 

t  Parker's  Discourse,  p.  6.  ?  Newman's  Phases,  p.  232. 

I'  The  Progress  of  the  Intellect,  vol.  i,  n   18.  IT  Ibirl.  vol.  ii.  pp.  3l>6,  4G5,  4CG. 


lOG  si'IRItualism;  or,  ±B.r.  denial 

in  the  Heorew  mind,  but  he  "  cannot  kdmit  tlie  atonement  doc- 
trine to  have  been  authorized  by  Jesi^.s  as  part  of  his  rehgion."^ 
He  is  aware,  however,  that  the  teaching  of  Christ  had  something 
to  do  with  the  doctrine,  and  that  the  evangelists  in  recording  his 
sayings  are  not  altogether  silent  in  reference  to  it.  But  the 
"foolishness"  cannot  be  tolerated,  the  "stumbling-block"  must  be 
removed,  though  it  be  at  the  expense  of  Christ's  character  and  the 
credit  of  the  sacred  record.  Jesus,  accordingly,  is  represented  j- 
as  having  eventually  been  influenced,  contrary  to  his  original 
intentions,  by  the  prevailing  idea  of  meritorious  suffering,  in  order 
"  to  uphold  his  sinking  cause."  "  He  used  the  terms  and  symbols 
of  his  age."  These  the  disciples  applied  literally,  "  thereby  creating 
a  superstitious  mystery  never  deliberately  contemplated  by  their 
master."!  That  there  are  "  distinct  announcements  by  Jesus  of 
his  propitiatory  death,"  recorded  in  the  gospels,  Mr.  Mackay  does 
not  venture  to  deny.  But  he  easily  disposes  of  them.  Just  as 
Mr.  Newman,  after  putting  the  fifty-third  chapter  of  Isaiah  on  the 
rack,  and  failing  to  extort  a  confession  to  his  liking,  settled  the 
matter  by  saying  that  he  "  had  no  proof  that  the  narrative  had  not 
been  strained  by  credulity," — so  Mr.  Mackay  declares  that  none 
of  the  distinct  announcements  referred  to  "  can  be  relied  on  as 
authentic ;"  or,  lest  this  should  be  going  too  far, "  it  seems  needless 
to  ascribe  to  them  more  than  the  figurative  sense."§  Miracles  are 
impossible,  says  Strauss.  The  doctrine  of  atonement  is  incredible, 
says  Mackay.  And  notliing  remains  but  to  falsify  the  record,  or 
to  bring  myths  and  symbolism  to  account  for  them. 

Mr.  Mackay  does  not  sa,y,  with  Mr.  Newman,  that  the  atone- 
ment might  be  dropt  out  of  "  Pauline  religion"  without  affecting 
its  quality ;  any  more  than  he  says,  with  Mr.  Foxton,  that  in  the 
teaching  of  Christ  there  is  not  the  slightest  allusion  to  the  doctrine. 
On  the  contrary,  this  doctrine  is  made  an  essential  part  of  the 
"Pauline  development" — a  development  very  different  indeed 
from  the  scriptural  one  wliich  took  place  in  the  minds  of  the 
apostles  after  the  resurrection  and  ascension  of  then  Lord.  Chris- 
tianity, according  to  him,  had  now  shifted  its  ground.  "  The 
Christianity  of  Paul  differs  from  that  of  Jesus  as  an  imparted  in- 
fluence from  without  differs  from  moral  effort  from  wdthin."  ij  In 
other  words,  Christ  is  represented  as,  on  the  whole,  discouraging 
the  idea  of  vicarious  atonement,  though  using  its  symbolical 
terms ;  and  pleading  simply  for  amendment,  sincerity,  and  moral 
purity.  While  Paul  is  spoken  of  as  having  been  the  first  to  make 
the  necessity  of  atonement  felt  by  proving  the  inefiicacy  of  the  law 
for  justification,  and  then  as  having  supplied  it.  ^  Tims  it  is, 
according  to  "  the  Progress  of  the  Intellect,"  that  "  the  Hebrew 

*  The  Progress  of  the  Intellect,  vol.  ii.  p.  4C.1. 

+  Ibia.  vol.  ii.  p.  305.  t  Ibi'l.  vol.  ii.  p.  464.  ?  Ihid.  vol.  ii.  pp.  3?!,  4G3. 

II  Ibid,  vol,  ii.  p.  391.  IT  Ibid,  vol,  ii.  p.  396. 


CF    THE    BIBLE    IIEDEJJPTION.  107 

Palladium  "  has  been  "  inherited  by  Christians."*  The  atonement 
then,  even  in  the  estimation  of  Mr.  Mackaj'-,  could  not  he  spunged 
out  of  Paul's  religion  without  affecting  its  quality.  He  scorns  it, 
however,  as  an  excrescence,  a  special  dogma  that  loads  and  ob- 
scures the  moral  conception  or  the  simple  element  called  absolute 
religion.  The  atonement,  which  in  Scripture  is  represented  as  the 
brightest  manifestation  of  God's  love  to  our  fallen  race,  and  which 
has  ever  been  regarded  as  such  by  the  Christian  world,  is  conse- 
quently made  hideous,  and  spoken  of,  after  the  Parker  fashion,  as 
"practically  giving  to  Christianity  a  character,  which,  though  it 
have  an  ill  sound  it  would  be  vain  as  well  as  dishonest  to  dis- 
semble, that  of  a  religion  of  Moloch."f 

Had  we  been  reviewing  Mr.  Mackay's  work  as  a  whole,  v/e 
would  have  felt  ourselves  called  upon  to  shov\r  the  untenableness 
of  his  mythical  theory,  the  baselessness  of  his  assumption  that  all 
religion  is  and  can  only  be  a  form  of  symbolism.  He  accounts 
for  the  origin  of  Christianity,  as  we  have  already  noticed,  in  a  way 
somewhat  similar  to  that  of  Strauss.  His  "  Progress  of  the  In- 
tellect" is  just  the  reproduction  among  us  of  what  has  had  its  day 
elsewhere.  So  that  the  answer  to  Strauss  is  substantially  the 
ansvyer  to  be  given  to  his  notions  of  the  Messianic  development.! 
But  it  is  only  with  what  bears  on  the  atonement  that  we  have  at 
present  to  do.  And  here  his  development  theory  is  at  fault. 
History  is  opposed  to  it.  And  it  is  only  by  the  most  gross  as- 
sumptions, that  the  conflicting  evidence  of  history  is  set  aside. 
Any  writer  who  should  deal  with  the  Hebrevf  Scriptures  as  he  has 
done,  could  not  be  expected  to  feel  much  scruple  in  tv/isting  the 
New  Testament  record.  It  serves  his  theory  of  symbolism,  to 
make  out  idolatry  or  Moloch-worship  to  have  been  the  practice  of 
the  early  Hebrews.  The  ancient  Hebrew  God,  according  to  him, 
was  only  one  of  the  many  gods  of  the  nations,  and  cannibalism 
was  associated  with  the  rites  paid  to  him  by  the  people.  The 
sacred  record  is  at  open  conflict  with  this,  the  fact  being  that  in 
the  earliest  Hebrew  writings  we  have  some  of  the  sublimest 
descriptions  of  the  glory  of  the  one  God  that  are  to  be  found  in 
the  Bible.     Mr.  Mackay  feels  this.     But  in  order  to  preserve  his 

*  Tlie  Pro?re?s  of  the  Intellect,  vol.  ii.  p.  465.  +  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  4€6. 

t  Yv'e  should  also  have  taken  Mr.  Mackay  to  task  in  regard  to  a  considerable 
number  of  his  Scripture  references.  It  was  truly  difficult  to  account  formany  of 
these  references,  or  to  see  ho'.v  they  bore  out  his  statements,  till  we  reflected  that 
he  had  beforehand  wanted  us  of  his  intention  to  be  guided  more  by  German 
(neological)  cx-iticism  than  by  the  English  version  of  the  Bible.  For  example,  it 
serves  Mr.  Mackay's  theory,  to  maintain  that  Christ  "  was  unconscious  of  his  own 
mission  "  till  he  was  baptized  of  John  ;  and  for  proof  he  refers  us  to  John  i.  26, 
33  ;  vii.  27.  Why  did  he  not  tell  us  how  the  ignorance  of  the  Baptist  and  of  the 
people  proved  unconsciousness  on  the  part  of  Christ  ?  Again,  —  as  an  evidence 
that  the  "  ancient  Hebrew  God"  was  only  one  of  the  many  gods,  and  that  He  ac- 
knowledged their  existence,  we  are  referred  to  Deut.  xxxii.  17 — 21.  On  the  same 
principle,  it  might  be  maintained  that  missionaries  acknowledge  the  real  exist- 
ence of  the  gods  of  the  heathen  and  are  jealous  of  them. — Vsl.  ii.  pp.  315,  416, 


108  spiritualism;  on.  xiii::  i;enial 

tlieory.  lie  is  forced  to  come  out  witli  the  assertion  that  the  Bible 
\^a■itei•s  have  transferred  to  olden  times  improvements  of  newer 
date,  —  ancient  Moloch  practices  having  been  cleansed  by  modern 
■wliite-wash,  and  then  impressed  witli  the  stamp  of  antiqnity.^;- 
And  if  we  ask  for  evidence  in  support  of  this  "  borrowed  belief," 
we  receive  no  better  answer  than  that  it  must  have  been  so  because 
his  development  theory  requires  it.  Having  in  this  way  made  out 
a  Hebrew  development  from  mere  nature-worship  up  througli 
polytheism  to  the  recognition  of  a  personal  and  independent  God, 
it  could  not  be  difficult  for  him  to  make  out  a  Christian  develop- 
ment in  which  Christ  and  Paul  stand  at  antipodes — a  develop- 
ment, however,  according  to  his  own  showing,  in  a  contrary 
direction,  from  better  to  v.'orse. 

But  this  is  no  more  the  development  of  tlije  New  Testament 
than  the  other  is  of  the  Old.  There  was  development  throughout 
the  period  embraced,  by  the  New  Testament  record,  but  it  was 
like  the  morning  light  which  shineth  more  and  more  until  the 
perfect  day.  Men  must  pi-esume  very  much  upon  the  unreasoning 
Vinbelief  or  intense  hatred  of  our  age  in  regard  to  evangelical 
religion,  who  can  say,  either  that  there  is  not  the  slightest  allusion 
in  tlie  teaching  of  Jesus  to  the  evangelical  doctrine  of  atonement, 
or  that  He  on  the  whole  discouraged  the  idea  of  it.  That  the  doc- 
trine is  not  so  fully  enunciated  in  the  discourses  of  Christ  as  in 
the  letters  of  his  apostles  must  be  admitted.  But  this  is  just  what 
might  have  been  expected  In  the  one  case,  the  work  of  atone- 
ment was  unfulfilled;  in  tiiw  otlicr  case,  it  was  finished  and  had 
become  matter  of  history.  Besides,  the  strain  of  Christ's  teaching 
pointed  to  the  time  wheii  the  germs  of  truth  which  He  had  thrown 
out  among  his  disciples  would  be  fully  unfolded,  v/hen,  under  an 
increased  ciliilgence  from  on  high,  they  should  see  the  truth  en- 
shrined in  his  sayings  which  their  prejudices  prevented  them  from 
now  doing.  Tlie  atonement  was  embraced  in  Christ's  teaching. 
What  can'be  more  explicit  than  his  own  words — words  which  are 
felt  to  be  a  difficulty  even  by  Mr.  Mackay — "  The  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his 
life  a  ransom  for  many."  The  *' Pauline  development"  was  not 
different  from  this,  nor  anything  added  to  this,  but  it  was  this  very 
truth  more  fully  unfolded,"and  made,  as  it  was  designed  to  be,  the 
grand  central  fact  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  The  ]n-ogress  of  the 
New  Testament  was  no  more  "  the  Progress  of  the  Intolleet"  than 
was  tlie  progress  of  the  ancient  Hebrews.  And  Mr.  Mackay  fails 
in  giving  us  anything  more  than  assumption  for  his  bold  denial 
that  the  doctrine  of  Paul's  e])istlcs  is  countenanced  by  the  pi'ophets 
and  the  Great  Teacher,  as  completely  as  he  does  in  finding  a  base 
ment  for  his  assertions  that  idolatry  Avas  the  established  religion 

*  The  Trogreas  of  the  latellect,  vol.  ii.  pp.  405 — 115. 


OJ;-    THE    BIDLE    REUEMPTIOX.  109 

m  Tsrael  up  to  the  reign  of  Josiah  —  that  the  prophets  then,  m 
adaptation  to  the  wants  of  the  age,  remodelled  the  system,  made 
Jehovah,  who  had  hitherto  been  only  one  among  the  many  Gods, 
now  the  Universal  Power,  and  then  represented  this  better  religion 
as  tlie  religion  of  Moses  and  the  early  Hebrews.  "We  are  con- 
strained to  say,  that  jNlr.  ]\[ackay,  in  thus  dealing  with  history, 
is  guilty  of  the  very  deception  which  he  woidd  charge  upon  the 
"  holy  men  of  God,"  and  our  wonder  is  how  he  can  attempt  to 
palm  it  upon  the  world.  ])ut  the  atonement  must  be  got  rid  of. 
The  Gospel  doctrines  must  be  deprived  of  their  historical  basis. 
And,  since  the  attempt  to  expel  them  from  the  sacred  page  has 
confessedly  failed,  nothing  remains  but  to  resolve  them  into  the 
conceptions  of  a  past  age,  to  bring  them  before  the  chancery  of 
the  mind's  own  decisions,  and  to  dismiss  them  as  unfit  for  this 
stage  in  "  the  Progress  of  the  Intellect." 

In  noticing  Mr.  Morell  in  this  connection,  we  wish  to  be  under- 
stood as  indicating  the  tendency  of  his  speculations  on  religion 
rather  than  their  actual  results.  Wide  indeed  is  the  difference 
between  the  spirit  in  which  he  treats  of  such  matters,  and  that  of 
Messrs.  Parker,  Newman,  and  Mackay.  And  yet  the  "  School  of 
Progress,"  as  if  conscious  of  some  links  of  sympatliy  between  him 
and  them,  regard  him  as  advancing  on  the  same  path,  only  keeping 
a  little  beliind.  He,  in  common  with  them,  resolves  religion  into 
a  peculiar  mode  of  feeling.  And  though  not,  like  them,  seeking 
utterly  to  demolish  the  objective  element,  he  reduces  it  to  com- 
paratively little  value.  The  subjective  or  intuitional  consciousness 
has  in  his  speculations  a  province  assigned  to  it  that  can  scarcely 
consist  with  tlie  claim  of  Scripture  to  be  accounted  the  lavv'  and 
the  testimony.  It  is  not  what  history  has  attested  to  be  authentic 
that  we  are  to  receive,  but  what  we  leel  to  be  morally  and  religiously 
true.    "  The  Philosophy  of  lieligion"  is  but  a  form  of  spiritualism. 

Mr.  Morell  attaches  much  importance  to  the  philosophical 
groundwork  that  he  has  laid  in  the  first  two  chapters  of  his  boolc. 
And  it  is  found  to  influence  all  his  subsequent  speculations  on  the 
subjective  nature  of  religion.  Into  a  minute  examination  of  that 
groundwork,  it  would  be  out  of  place  for  us  here  to  enter.  With 
much  of  it  we  find  no  fault.  But  the  broadly  prominent  principle 
that  runs  throughout  it,  is,  in  our  apprehension,  unsound  and 
mischievous.  We  refer  to  Ms  development  of  the  "  principal 
points  of  distinction  between  our  logical  and  intuition  faculties" — 
a  distinction,  as  he  says,  of  vital  importance,  and  which  he  carries 
along  with  him  when"^  arguing  on  the  relation  of  philosophy  to 
religion.  He  says,':=  "  there  is  ones  tate  of  our  intellectual  con- 
sciousness by  virtue  of  which  we  define  terms,  form  propositions, 
construct  reasonings,  and  perform  the  whole  office  that  we  usually 

*  Philosophy  of  Religion,  p.  33. 


iiif  sr-iBiTUALiSM ;  or.,  tue  denial 

attribute  to  a  mind  that  acts  hgically ;  but  there  is  also  another 
state  of  our  intellectual  consciousness,  in  which  the  material  of 
truth  comes  to  us  as  though  by  a  rational  instinct — a  mental  sen- 
sibility—  an  intuitive  power  —  a  'communis  sensus,'  traceable 
over  the  whole  surface  of  civilised  humanity."  These  two  classes 
of  phenomena  are  denominated  the  logical  and  tlie  intuitional 
consciousness.  That  there  is  a  distinction  between  these  two 
states  of  consciousness  —  a  distinction  recognised  before  the  times 
of  Mr.  Morell  —  we  readily  admit.  But  we  demur  to  the  way  in 
which  he  dispai-ts  the  one  from  the  other,  exalting  the  power  of 
intuition  at  the  expense  of  the  understanding,  and  assigning  it  an 
independence  and  efficiency  which  do  not  belong  to  it.  "With  re- 
gard to  higher  truths  and  laws,"  he  tells  us,  "  the  understanding 
furnishes  merely  the  subjective  forms,  in  w^hich  they  may  be 
logically  stated,  while  intuition  brings  us  face  to  face  witli  the 
actual  matter,  or  reality  of  truth  itself."  ■■'  We  open  our  eyes  and 
we  see  at  once  the  blue  heavens  and  the  green  earth.  In  like 
manner,  Mr.  i!iIorell  vvould  have  us  to  believe,  the  mind  by  its 
simple  spontaneous  power  of  intuition  looks  out,  "  and  the  absolute 
stands  before  us  in  all  its  living  reality."  Now  we  maintain,  in 
opposition  to  this,  that  the  understanding  has  much  to  do  in 
enabling  us  to  reach  the  mount  of  vision,  and  that  it  is  not  re- 
stricted to  the  humble  function  of  giving  logical  expression  to  the 
supersensual  truth  we  gaze  upon  there.  Mr.  Morell  v/ould  kick 
away  the  ladder  by  v/hich  he  had  been  helped  upward,  and  then 
refuse  to  admit  that  it  had  rendered  him  any  assistance.  "  It  is 
not  enough  for  our  author  to  say,  as  all  sensible  men  have  ever 
said,  that  our  knowledge  of  *  the  true,  the  beautiful,  and  the  good,' 
comes  to  us  in  j)art  fi'om  our  intuitions,  he  is  peremptory  in  assert- 
ing that  it  comes  to  us  only  from  that  source  —  a  doctrine  which 
caa  never  be  made  to  harmonise  with  anything  deserving  the 
name  of  philosophy ;  and  which  must  prove  eminently  hostile  to 
the  purity  of  religion." f  | 

*  Philosophy  of  Relieiou,  p.  19.  +  British  Quarterly,  No.  XIX.  p.  149. 

t  The  author  of  "  The  Eclipse  of  Faith," — a  work  that  carries  vPi-y  destructive 
fire  into  the  enemy's  camp, — in  commenting  "  on  a  prevailing  fallacy,"  thus  ad- 
dres'?es  our  modern  "  spiritualists."  —  "  You  do  not  sufficiently  regard  man  as  a 
complicated  unity;  —  you  represent,  if  you  do  not  suppose,  the  several  capacities 
of  his  nature — the  dilierent  parts  of  it, "sensational,  emotional,  intellectual,  moi-al, 
spii-itual, —  as  set  off  from  one  another  by  a  sharper  boundary  lino  than  nature 

acknowledges What  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  whether  we  have  a 

distinct  religious  faculty,  or  whether  it  be  the  result  of  the  action  of  many 
faculties,  the  functions  of  our  'spiritual"  nature  are  performed  by  the  instru- 
mentality, and  involve  the  intervention  of  the  very  same  much-abused  faculties 
which  enable  us  to  perform  any  other  function?  ....  Eeligious  ^rM<A,  like 
any  other  truth,  is  embraced  by  the  understanding — as  indeed  it  would  be  a  queer 
kind  of  truth  that  is  not ;  is  stated  in  propositions,  yields  inferences,  is  adorned 
by  eloquence,  is  illustrated  by  the  imagination,  and  is  thus,  as  well  as  from  its 
intrinsic  claims,  rendered  powerful  over  the  emotions,  the  affections,  and  the 
will Hence  we  see  the  dependence  of  the  true  development  of  re- 


OF   THE    BIULE    HEDE JIPTIOr.  ill 

In  applying  tins  philosophy  to  the  fundamental .  questions  in- 
volved in  his  subject,  Mr.  Morell  very  naturally  considers  in  the 
first  j)lace,  what  is  the  peculiar  essence  of  religion?  He  here 
ti'eats  the  matter  subjectively — not  as  a  system  of  truth  or  form 
of  doctrine,  but  simply  as  a  fact  or  phenomenon  in  human  na- 
ture. He  lays  dovai  the  position  "  that  there  are  just  ^/iive  great 
and  fundamental  forms  of  man's  inward  consciousness  expressed 
by  the  terms  knowing,  iciWuvj,  feeVmrjy'''-  And,  in  determining 
to  which  of  these  generic  forms  of  consciousness  religion  belongs, 
he,  of  course,  fixes  on  feeling.  The  great  error  in  his  philosophy 
in  particg  off  the  intuitional  from  the  logical  consciousness,  has 
here  its  counterpai't  in  the  separation  between  religious  knov/ledge 
and  religious  feeling.  It  is  not  enough  for  him  to  say,  "that  there 
may  be  many  gradations  of  religious  intensity  iw  men,  whose 
amount  of  knowledge  is  as  nearly  as  possible  identical;  and  on 
the  other  hand,  that  there  may  be  about  an  equal  manifestation  of 
rehgious  intensity  where  the  degrees  of  knovdedge  are  immensely 
at  variance."  No  sane  mind  denies  tliis.  But  he  concludes  that 
"religion  is  really  cradled  in  some  phenomenon  lying  icithout  the 
region  of  what  we  may  term  intellectual  activity;"  and,  "that 
although  the  co-operation  of  knowledge  may  be  necessaiy  to  the 
perfection  of  our  religious  life, "yet  it  does  necessarily  enter  into  the 
"  essential  germ"  of  religion.!  We  do  not  much  object  to  the  state- 
ment, that  religion,  suljectively  considered,  consists  in  the  feeling 
of  dependence  upon  God ;  but  vv'e  deny  that  any  emotion  worthy 
of  the  name  of  religion  can  exist  without  some  knowledge  of  divine 
things.  Mr.  Morell  obviously  felt  himself  entangled  here  by  his 
pliilosophy,  for  while  the  diift  of  the  chapter  is  to  assert  the  inde- 
pendence and  exclusive  importance  of  feeling  as  he  had  done  that 
of  the  intuitional  consciousness,  lie  yet  asserts  that  the  co-operation 
of  knowledge  may,  "  in  a  subordinate  sense,"  be  necessary  to  the 
very  existence  of  our  religious  life.  If  the  scholastic  and  many  of 
the  rationalistic  theologians  made  too  much  of  the  mere  form  of 
knowing,  Mr.  Morell  assuredly  makes  too  much  of  the  mere  form 
of  feeling.  It  results,  as  we  have  seen  in  such  men  as  Parker  and 
Newman,  in  attaching  no  importance  whatever  to  an  objective 
revelation ;  and,  as  we  will  see,  in  the  case  of  such  as  Morell,  in 
assigning  a  very  subordinate  place  to  it. 

In  treating  of  the  Essence  of  Christianity,  vv'hieli  is  done  in 
the  next  chapter,  the  subjectivity  of  our  autlior  becomes  more 
and  more  manifest.  We  reckon  this  chapter  a  complete  mis- 
nomer. It  is  as  if  an  astronomer  were  to  give  us  an  historical 
description  of  the  tlioughts  and  feelings  awakened  within  him 

ligion  ou  thft  just  and  harmonious  action  of  all  our  faculties.  They  march  toge- 
ther ;  and  it  is  the  glorious  prerogative  of  true  i-eligion  that  it  makes  them  do  so." 
—  The  Jk'ciivse  of  Faith,  p.  305,  &c. 

*  Philosophy  of  Btligion,  p.  G6  +  ILiJ.  p.  69. 


1]:3  spiritualism;  oh,  the  denial 

during  Ins  surveys  of  the  heavens,  and  to  designate  it  a  treatise  on 
astronomy,  instead  of  giving  us  a  discourse  on  the  magnitudes, 
distances,  and  revolutions  of  the  planets.  The  Essence  of  Chris- 
tianity is  a  phrase  which  conveys  to  an  English  reader  the  idea  of 
those  grand  doctrines  which  distinguish  it  from  all  other  forms  of 
religion.  But  Mr.  Morell  generally  here  puts  the  effect  for  the  cause, 
and  sometimes  plays  on  the  two  different  senses  of  Christianity  as 
ohjective  and  suhjective.  He  says,  "  The  only  mode  in  which  we 
can  assign  the  true  nature  of  Christianity,  relativeh/  to  all  other 
religions  in  the  world,  and  show  wherein  its  essential  and  distin- 
guishing feature  consists,"  is  to  consider  "  what  is  the  distinguish- 
ing feature  of  man's  religious  nature,  when  it  has  come  properly 
under  the  Christian  infiuence."H=  He  denies  that  what  are  esteemed 
the  prominent  facts  and  main  doctrines  of  Christianity  determine 
tlie  essence  of  Christianity  itself.  This,  he  tells  us,  "  does  not 
consist  in  any  development  of  thought,  but  in  the  flow  of  holy  afFec- 
tions."f  The  outward  revelation,  according  to  this  system,  is  not 
Christianity,  it  is  only  a  means  to  awaken  it.  The  Gospel  is 
viewed  rather  as  an  external  provision  for  cultivating  certain  states 
of  feeling,  than  as  an  authoritative  communication  from  heaven 
designed  to  build  us  up  in  the  knowledge  of  Divine  things.  Chris- 
tianity, as  a  distinct  spiritual  life,  is  made  to  occupy  the  place  of 
Christianity  as  a  body  of  inspired  truth  by  which  the  spiritual  life 
is  organized.  The  true  state  of  matters  is  completely  reversed. 
And  this  Philosophy  of  Religion  tends,  like  the  systems  of  Parker 
and  Newman,  to  make  everything  of  the  feelings  within,  and  to 
reduce  to  little  or  almost  nothing  the  objective  truth  that  lies 
without 

Mr.  Morell,  though  chiefly  engi-ossed  with  the  subjective  point 
of  vievr,  does  not,  however,  ignore  the  objective.  He  defines 
Christianity,  viewed  as  an  outward  condition  of  the  religious  life, 
to  be  "  that  rehgion  which  rests  upon  the  consciousness  of  the 
redemption  of  the  world  through  Jesus  Christ."^  He  very  pro- 
perly notices  two  great  and  essential  points  here  —  "  the  exclimve- 
ness  of  Christianity  as  the  sole  appointed  means  of  human  re- 
covery, and  the  concentration  of  the  agency  for  such  recovery  in 
the  life  and  person  of  Christ,  historically  considered."§  But  be- 
yond this  we  have  no  explanation.  He  does  not  say  what  is 
implied  in  the  redemption  of  the  world,  or  what  was  the  nature  of 
the  moral  expedient  devised  for  its  accomplishment.  And  he  is 
silent  also  as  to  the  truth  about  the  personal  Eedeemer.  This  is 
unpardonable  even  in  a  philosophical  discussion  of  the  essence  of 
Christianity,  and  while  professing  to  look  at  the  objective  side  of 
the  question.  Mr.  Morell  knows  very  well  that  the  redemption  of 
tiie  world  through  Christ  is  about  one  of  the  vaguest  expressions 

*  Philosophy  of  Religion,  p.  100.  +  Ibid.  p.  2.->0.  t  Ibid.  p.  i:8. 

i  Ibid.  p.  IIP 


OF    THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION.  113 

current  in  modern  times.  It  would  cover  the  whole  "  scliool  of 
progress."  Under  its  ample  shade  would  come  multitudes  of 
teachers  in  Germany,  America,  England,  and  elsewhere,  whose 
ideas  of  redemption  and  the  Eedeemer  are  as  far  apart  from  the 
Christian  doctrines  as  the  east  is  from  the  west.  This  vague  and 
hrief  allusion  to  the  ohjective  element  can  only  be  exjilained  on 
the  principle,  so  dear  to  our  modern  sentimentalists,  of  unduly 
magnifying  everything  within  man  and  lessening  whatever  comes 
to  him  in  the  shape  of  religion  from  without.  What  Mr.  Morell's 
views  are  of  the  process  through  which  the  redemption  of  the 
world  has  been  effected,  and  of  the  personal  constitution  of  the 
Eedeemer,  we  know  not.  But  he  has  laid  himself  open  to  the 
suspicion  of  making  the  essential  elements  of  the  Christian  life 
independent  of  those  grand  peculiar  doctrines  which  have  been 
generally  understood  to  be  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.=!^ 

It  is  foreign  to  our  pm-pose,  to  review  the  whole  of  "  The  Philo 
sophy  of  lieligiou."  We  only  point  out  some  of  its  strongly 
marked  tendencies  towards  that  philosophic  spiritualism  which  is 
so  destructive  of  the  essence  of  Christianity.  These  are,  indeed, 
to  be  found  in  every  chapter  of  the  Avork.  In  passing  on,  for 
example,  to  speak  of  the  method  by  which  Christianity  was  first 
communicated  to  the  human  mind,  he  defines  revelation  to  be 
"a  process  of  the  intuitional  consciousness  gazing  upon  eternal 
verities."!'  He  denies  that  the  Bible,  strictly  speaking,  is  a  reve- 
lation, "  since  a  revelation  always  implies  an  actual  process  of  in- 
telligence in  a  living  mind."J  And  he  asserts,  that  "  the  power 
which  that  book  possesses  of  conveying  a  revelation  to  us,  consists 
in  its  aiding  in  the  awakenment  and  elevation  of  our  religious 
consciousness."  We  have  here,  as  throughout  the  whole  treatise,  a 
systematic  undervaluing  of  objective  truth.  Christ  and  His  apos- 
tles are  represented  as  giving  no  exposition  of  Christian  doctrine 
to  the  understanding,  but  as  seeking  to  awaken  man's  power  of 
spiritual  intuition ;  and  since  it  cannot  be  denied  that  Paul  gives 
such  a  systematic  inculcation  of  truth,  we  are  reminded  that  "  his 
writings  were  designed  not  so  much  to  be  a  revelation  of  truth,  as 
a  further  explication  of  it."§  He  would  make  Paul  the  theologian, 
and  John  the  intuitionist.  Now,  in  reply  to  this,  it  might  be  said, 
in  the  first  place,  that  it  is  not  true,  that  Christ  and  the  apostles 
gave  no  systematic  exposition  of  doctrine.  The  sermon  on  the 
mount,  and  the  discoiu'se  on  the  way  to  Eramaus  when  "begin- 

*  "  No  philosophy  of  religion  that  assumes  to  embrace  Christianity  can  be 
complete  if  it  does  not  show  that  salvation  was  effectuated  by  a  process  alike  con- 
gruous with  the  Divine  char-'^ter,  and  with  man's  constitution  and  moral  neces- 
sity. It  may  be  replied,  that  this  is  the  province  of  Christian  theology,  and  not  of 
internal  subjective  Christianity.  We  incline,  however,  to  the  opinion  that  the 
idea  of  'a  just  God  aud  a  Saviour,"  through  the  atonement  of  Christ,  is  the 
meeting-place,  the  point  where  Christianity  as  a  theology  loses  itself  in  Chris- 
tianity as  a  religion."  —  Mr.  Morell  and  the  Sources  of  his  In/urwation.  p.  38. 

t  Philosopuy  of  Ileligion,  p.  141  t  Ibid,  pp,  143,  HI.         I  Ibid.  pp.  ^39— 111- 

J 


114  BnilTTUALTSM  )    OR,    THE    DEKiAL 

Ding  at  Moses  and  all  the  projDhets,  be  expouuded  imto  them  in 
all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concerning  himself,"  not  to  mention 
othei-  discourses,  contradict  the  statement  in  so  far  as  the  Great 
Teacher  is  concerned.  The  book  of  Acts  falsifies  the  statement  in 
reference  to  the  apostles.  And,  in  the  logical  expositions  of  Paul, 
we  have  as  many  new  ideas  revealed  as  in  John,  which  proves 
that  truth  may  be  given  first  in  a  systematic  or  theological  form. 
Besides,  it  is  a  mere  play  on  words  to  say  that  the  revelation  was 
made  in  the  mind,  not  in  the  Book.  The  Bible  is  the  actual  reve- 
lation imparted  to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers.  It  brings  us 
la  contact  with  knowledge  which,  in  its  origin,  lay  beyond  both 
lie  intuitional  and  the  logical  consciousness ;  and,  in  conveying 
itie  truth  to  us,  it  addresses  the  understanding,  and,  through  it, 
rises  higher  into  the  region  of  actual  experience.  God  disclosed 
Ihe  revelation  originally  in  the  minds  of  Isaiah  and  Paul,  and  the 
inspiring  Spirit  so  guided  them  that  the  oracle  came  forth  un- 
changed to  us.  Yv'hat  Mr.  Morell,  then,  calls  special  and  Divine 
arrangements  for  elevating  the  religious  consciousness,  we  persist 
in  calling  the  revelation  of  God. 

The  preceding-  remarks  have  prepared  ris  for  considering  what  our 
author's  views  are  as  to  the  true  bond  of  religious  fellowship  and  as  to 
the  true  basis  of  religious  certitude.  And  here,  also,  the  man  of  mere 
feeling  appears  very  prominent.  Things  which  God  hath  joined 
together,  are  here  put  asunder.  "  The  ground  of  all  true  union 
amongst  Christians,"  he  tells  us,  "is  to  be  found,  not  in  the  common 
consent  of  the  understanding  to  certain  theological  definitions, 
but  in  the  common  development  of  the  intuitional  consciousness 
as  regards  man's  religious  life."*  It  is  not  enough  for  Mr.  Morell 
to  say,  that  no  system  of  theological  doctrine  can  of  itself  secure 
religious  fellowship,  he  must  maintain  that  the  latter  is  inde- 
pendent of  the  former.  He  reasons  on  the  assumption  that  if  the 
basis  of  fellowship  be  moral  in  its  character  it  cannot  be  theological, 
or  that  if  it  be  theological  it  cannot  be  moral.  We  have  always 
thought  that  tlie  moral  power  of  Christianity  lay  in  its  doctrines 
ur.derstood  and  believed,  and  that  Christian  feliowsliip,  or  a  true 
Evangelical  alliance,  must  depend  upon  unanimity  of  religious 
feeling  and  adoption  of  common  doctrines  combined;  and  not 
only  so,  but  that  the  influence  of  the  two  things  would  be  reci- 
procal, the  belief  in  the  common  doctrines  strengthening  the 
common  feeling,  and  the  common  feeling  strengthening  the  belief 
in  the  doctrines.  But  "  The  Pl)ilosophy  of  Beligion,"  in  accord- 
ance uith  its  previous  speculations,  separates  the  one  fiom  the 
other. 

]\]r.  Morell's  first  reason  for  rejecting  a  fixed  theological  test 
of  fellowsliip,  is  the  want  of  authority  for  it  in  tho  apostolic  church. 

*  riiilosopliy  of  Religion,  p.  2S3, 


OF    THE    EIBLE    EEDEMPTION.  115 

•'  The  bond  of  union,"  he  says,  'i=  "  amongst  the  early  churches  was, 
the  powerful  awakening  of  the  religious  consciousness,  originating 
in  and  maintained  by  an  intense  belief  of  the  great  facts  connected 
with  the  life,  the  death,  and  the  resurrection  of  Christ."  And 
w^hat,  we  ask,  were  these  great  facts  but  a  doctrinal -basis?  His 
second  reason,  wliich  he  anticipates  will  startle  us,  is,  that 
theological  statements  do  not  contain  any  essential  element  of 
Christianity,  f  This  arises  out  of  the  false  principle  that  the 
essence  of  Christianity  is  only  cognizable  directly  by  the  intui- 
tional consciousness,  and  is  supported  only  by  telling  us  of 
persons  who  "take  the  sign  for  the  thing;  the  counter  for  the 
money."  But  his  principal  objection,  "  and  one  which  admits  of 
liistorical  verification,"  is,  that  a  fixed  logical  or  doctrinal  basis, 
''tends  inevitably  to  the  gi-adual  extinction  of  all  that  is 2)ositive 
in  Christianity."!  Mr.  Morell's  historical  evidence  only  proves 
that  churches,  despite  then-  doctrinal  standards,  have  often  lost 
the  life  of  true  religion,  a  thing  which  no  one  denies,  but 
against  which  the  mere  flow  of  feeling,  irrespective  of  ob- 
jective truth,  affords  no  guarantee.  He  appeals,  among  othet 
places,  to  Geneva  and  Scotland,  §  and  so  do  we.  And  we 
tell  him  that  there  is  a  chiu'ch  in  Geneva — though  it  be  little 
among  the  thousands  of  Judali — possessed  of  life  and  power  which 
adheres  firmly  to  a  doctrinal  basis ;  and  that  no  country  has 
ever  enjoyed  more  of  the  religious  life  than  Scotland,  which  has 
always  attached  much  importance  to  theological  doctrines.  We 
have  as  little  sympathy  as  Mr.  Morell  with  lifeless  forms  and  a 
barren  orthodoxy.  But  the  idea  that  men,  or  communities,  can 
be  knit  together  in  holy  love,  while  at  variance  on  great  essential 
doctrines,  is  perfectly  Utopian.  There  is  much  in  this  talk  of 
leaving  doctrinal  matters  undetermined  in  view  of  a  broad  and 
general  fellowship,  that  reminds  one  of  Parker's  "  absolute  reli 
gion"  and  Newman's  "doctrine  of  divine  sympathy,"  over  each 
of  which  mJght  be  inscribed,  "  wide  is  the  gate  and  broad  is  the 
way,  and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat." 

Mr.  Morell's  basis  of  religious  certitude  accords  with  his  basis 
of  religious  fellowsliip.  He  removes  it  from  the  Bible  page  to 
the  religious  consciousness  of  humanity  which  it  awakens.  "  The 
basis  of  certitude,"  he  says,  "  lies  in  the  essential  characteristics  of 
the  intuitions  themselves — in  their  distinctness,  in  their  uni- 
formity, and  under  due  influences,  in  their  universality ;  not  in 
their  symbolical  representation  upon  the  sacred  page."l|  The  test 
is  thus  shifted  from  tlie  inspired  Book — the  law  and  the  testimony 
— to  a  comparison  of  inward  experiences.  The  ultimate  appeal 
is  not,  what  saith  the  Scripture?  but,  what  is  tlie  catholic  feeling 
and  thinking  of  the  Christian  community  ?     Such  an  appeal  may, 

*  Philosophy  of  Keligion,  p.  271,  +  Ibid.  p.  273.  i  Ibid.  p.  278. 

I  Ibid.  pp.  281—280.  il  Ibid.  p.  337. 


116  spiritualism;  ok,  the  denial 

in  certain  eircnmstances,  serve  to  corroborate,  but  can  never  afford 
a  sure  criterion.  And  tben,  bow  could  it  be  applied  in  cases 
wbere  tbe  teachers  of  Christianity  have  stood  almost  alone,  their 
intuitions  of  spiritual  things  being  very  partially  expeiienced  by 
others?  Besides,  how  are  distinct,  uniform,  and  universal  intui- 
tions to  be  secured,  except  through  a  living  faith  in  the  gi'eat 
Christian  doctrines  as  revealed  in  the  Bible?  So  that  the  catholic 
feeling  and  thinking  of  the  wliole  Christian  community  must  fall 
back  on  the  Scriptures  as  at  once  a  ground  and  test.  The  want 
of  uniformity  in  the  results  of  Biblical  interpretation,  is  urged  by 
our  author  as  a  formidable  objection  against  making  the  Scriptm-es 
the  basis  of  religious  certitude ;  and  the  doctrine  of  private  judg- 
ment is  falsely  represented  as  if  rationalism  were  its  inevitable 
landing-phace.*  It  were  easy  to  retaliate  the  charge  of  want  of 
uniformity,  and  to  show  that  we  have  no  security  for  it  in  mere 
inward  experiences;  but  the  charge  is  unduly  exaggerated.  There 
is  a  wonderful  harmony  in  the  several  sections  of  the  Christian 
church,  in  regard  to  the  bearings  of  Scripture  on  the  great  doctrines 
of  salvation;  and  our  complacency  in  that  harmony  is  not  dis- 
turbed, any  more  than  our  confidence  in  the  principle  oi  private 
judgment  is  shaken,  by  pointing  us  to  such  reckless  unbelieving 
intei-preters  as  Paulus  and  Strauss.  We  deny  that  the  doctrine 
of  private  judgment  necessarily  cuts  us  off  from  the  Christian 
consciousness  of  mankind,  Avhile  we  assert  that  its  legitimate 
exercise  is  in  searching  the  Scriptures  to  see  whether  or  not  these 
things  are  so.  But  the  "  Philosophy  of  Religion"  will  not  allow 
"  that  the  data  of  Christian  theology  lie  before  us  fixed  and  com- 
plete in  the  Bible."  f  And  intimations  are  given  as  if  Christian 
ideas  were  subject  to  the  same  laws  of  development  as  the  truths 
of  astronomy.  It  is  a  fallacy  to  speak  of  Christian  doctrine  as  a 
germ  which  received  its  first  great  luifolding  in  the  apostolic  age, 
and  which  goes  on  receiving  other  unfoldings.  The  Christian 
doctrine  is  not  more  fully  unfolded  in  the  mind  of  a  believer  now 
than  it  was  in  the  days  of  Paul.  The  ])rogress  made  from  the  day 
of  Pentecost  till  the  apostles  finished  their  course,  does  not  find 
its  parallel  in  the  progress  subsequently  made  in  the  church.  In 
the  former  period,  the  Revelation  Avas  going  on  ;  the  latter  period 
received  it  complete.  And  the  only  kind  of  progress  that  awaits 
Christianity,  is  the  glorious  one  of  seeing  nation  after  nation 
coming  to  this  "  sempiternal  source  of  truth  divine,"  and  all  the 
sections  of  the  church  deeply  influenced  by,  and  united  together 
in,  the  belief  of  the  "  common  salvation."  Mr.  Morcll's  hopes  for 
the  world  and  for  imi'^y  and  peace  to  the  chin-ch,  rest,  however, 
on  the  power  of  the  intuitional  consciousness,  and  on  the  deve- 
lopment of  a  new  philosophy  which  shall  smite  all  our  theological 

*  PLilosophy  of  Religion,  pp.  331,  33-5.  +  Ibid.  pp.  375,  370. 


OF   THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION.  117 

dogmas  and  elevate  us  to  the  region  of  catholic  feeling.  The 
spiritualism  of  Mr.  Morell  wants  the  bold  otfensiveness  of  Parker 
and  Newman,  but  it  has  this  feature,  in  common,  that  it  unduly 
magnifies  everything  within  man,  and  leaves  little  or  no  authority 
to  the  objective  truth  lying  without.^= 

Such  specidations  as  the  above,  surrender  Christianity  into 
the  power  of  mere  sentiment.  That,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  case 
of  Parker,  Newman,  and  Mackay,  is  made  the  test  and  arbiter  of 
truth.  And  the  tendency  of  much  in  the  "  Philosophy  of  Beli- 
gion,"  is  to  bring  matters  to  the  same  standard.  Mr.  Morell  ima- 
gines, that,  under  such  custody,  we  would  be  led  "  from  the  barren 
region  of  mere  logical  forms,  into  the  hallowed  paths  of  a  divine 
life."  The  men  of  the  "  School  of  Progress"  know  full  well  what, 
these  paths  are,  and  hence  their  com^olacency  in  liis  speculations 
He  has  not  urged  the  moral  argument  against  the  evangelical 
doctrines,  nor  do  we  charge  him  with  denying  them,  but  those 
who  do  urge  it  are  disposed  to  look  upon  him  as  an  auxiliary  in 
the  same  warfare.  It  is  this  argument  that  runs  throughout,  or 
underlies,  many  of  the  Avritings  of  our  philosophical  spiritualists. 
It  extends,  like  a  broad  belt,  through  Parker's  "  Discourse,"  and 
Newman's  "  Phases."  It  is  involved  in  very  much  of  Mackay's 
"  Progress."  And,  in  some  other  productions,  it  is  supposed  to 
receive  a  tacit,  if  not  an  avowed,  support.  Texts  of  Scripture,  in- 
volving the  obnoxious  doctrines  of  redemption,  wliich  will  not  bend 
before  a  neological  exegesis,  are  reduced  under  the  weight  of  what 
is  called  the  moral  argument.     We  shall  scrutinize  it  for  a  little. 

The  argument  is  grounded  on  the  supposed  contradiction 
between  men's  moral  sentiments  and  the  i^eculiar  tenets  of  the 
evangelical  creed.  God  is  the  author  of  our  moral  nature,  and  his 
revealed  will  must  harmonize  with  its  utterances.     The  voice  of 

*  It  is  with  this  principle  of  suhjectivity,  that  the  Evangelical  Church  in 
Geneva  has  now  to  contend.  There  is  much  in  Scherer's  letter  to  D'Aubigne  that 
reminds  us  of  some  of  our  own  spiritualists,  all  of  whom  have  drunk  of  the 
philosophy  beyond  the  Rhine.  He  says  "the  Scriptures  are  the  productions  of 
great  saints  or  of  great  religious  heroes."  "  The  inspiration  of  the  apostles  is 
purely  religious."  "  For  the  simple  believer,  the  Bible  is  no  longer  an  aulhorihf, 
but  it  is  a  treasure."  "  Biblicism  is  not  merely  a  theological  error.but  it  is  a  plague 
upon  the  Church."  Calvin,  Beza,  and  the  other  Genevese  theologians,  had  to 
combat  the  same  errors  three  centuries  ago.  The  President  of  the  Theological 
Institute,  who  is  now  fighting  the  same  good  fight,  says,  in  his  well-timed  treatise : 
"  I  dread  this  subjective  tendency  in  our  limes.  I  dread  it,  convinced  that  it 
cannot  fail  to  have  the  same  developments,  and  the  same  consequences,  that  it 
had  in  the  sixteenth  century.  You  have  remarked  the  sad  progression  of  this 
opinion.  Chatillon  simply  taught  the  doctrine  which  substitutes  the  authority, 
of  the  individual  spirit  tor  the  authority  of  Divine  Scripture.  But  every  seed" 
hears  its  fruit.  This  doctrine,  soon  aft,er  professed  by  Socinus  and  Servetus, 
first  overthrew  all  the  doctrines  of  fuilh  ;  then,  interpreted  by  Coppin,  Pocquet, 
Gruet,  and  the  libertines,  overthrows  all  the  precepts  of  morality.  It  thus 
brou^rht  forth  great  heresies  and  frightful  irregularities.  The  progr  ession  is 
terriiile,  but  inevitable.  .  .  .  Tlipfovndation  of  Ckristia7i  dngma  and  Christian 
moraliti/,  is  involved  in  these  opinions." — The  Authority  of  God,  by  D'Aubigne, 
pp.  189,  190. 


113  SPlRiTUALIS:.!  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

tli8  Iinmiitaole  One  within  the  hreast,  pronouncing  decisively  on 
right  and  wrong,  can  never  be  falsified,  or  disputed,  by  the  Toice 
speaking  in  the  word.  Man's  reason  and  moral  consciousness, 
it  is  alle^c-oj  are  opposed  to  much  of  what  currently  passes  for  the 
Christian  theology.  In  the  latter,  views  are  given  of  God  and 
man  so  dark  and^wful  as  to  be  repulsed  by  the  former.  There 
is  a  collision,  it  is  maintained,  between  the  dark  creed  of  depra- 
vity, the  vindictive  justice  of  God  as  exhibited  in  the  atonement, 
and  the  indestructible  judgments  and  feelings  of  the  human  heart, 
Christ  has  revealed  unto  us  the  Father,  and  it  sufficeth  us.^  He 
has  taught  us  to  look  up  to  heaven,  and,  inspired  with  filial  con- 
fidence,^to  say,  "  Our  Abba,  our  Father."  He  has  inculcated  love 
to  our  enemies,  that  we  may  be  the  children  of  our  Father  in 
heaven,  who  maketh  his  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  on  the  good 
He  has  bidden  us  behold  God  as  a  Father  feeding  the  fowls  of  the 
air,  clothing  the  lilies  of  the  field,  and  much  more  caring  for  men 
his  ov/n  children.  These  are  sentiments  which  meet  with  a  wel- 
come response  in  every  human  bosom,  and  they  proclaim  them- 
selves divine.  They  are  in  unison  wdth  those  genial  currents  of 
thought  and  feeling  which  flow  through  the  soul  of  every  man  of 
sensibility,  when  looking  on  the  shining  heavens  and  the  green 
earth,  and  which  move  him  to  say,  "  My  Father  made  them  all." 
It  is  in  this  endearing  character,  that  we  must  view  Him  _  as  pre- 
siding over  the  universe,  pitying  men  even  as  a  father  pitieth  his 
children,  and  making  all  things  to  work  together  for  theii-  good. 
And,  it  is  in  this  character,  that  we  would  expect  to  meet  Him, 
in  making  a  special  revelation  of  Himself  to  the  world.  But  the 
doctrines  of  what  is  called  evangelism,  continues  the  objector,  con- 
flict with  such  sentiments  as  these.  Man  is  therein  represented 
as  a  most  wretched  object,  a  creature  shapen  in  iniquity,  and  a 
child  of  wrath.  The  God  of  mercy  is  exhibited  as  incensed  against 
his  own  offspring,  making  a  heavy  exaction  for  then-  guilt,  and 
being  appeased  only  by  the  interposition  of  his  well-beloved  Son. 
Eepentance  does  not  suffice  to  procure  forgiveness,  as,  from  the 
fatherly  character  of  God,  we  would  have  been  led  to  suppose. 
But  an  atonement  must  first  be  made  to  turn  away  God's  wrath, 
and  a  supernatural  povfer  must  be  exerted  to  raise  man  up  from 
his  degradation. 

These  are  strong  statements.  There  is  ni  them  much  gi-oss 
misrepresentation.  But  it  is  in  some  such  way  as  this,  that  the  re- 
liction of  the  moral  sentiments  and  the  orthodox  creed  are  arrayed 
against  each  other.  It  is  not,  as  in  the  old  rationalistic  con- 
troversy, a  warfare  waged  on  the  gi-ound  of  critical  exegesis.  But 
it  is  an  attempt  to  set  the  moral  nature  of  man  over  against  what 
the  general  mind  of  Christendom  has  pronounced  to  be  the  Eeve- 
lation  of  God.  Are,  then,  the  doctrines  of  redemption  irreconcile- 
able  wMth  the  paternity  of  God  ;  and  do  the  persons  who  urge  the 


or   THE    BIBLE    EEDEMPXION  111) 

moral  objection  give  a  view  of  the  Divine  character  that  is  acle- 
(juate,  and  consistent  with  the  nature  of  things  ?  We  trow  not ; 
and  we  assign  our  reasons. 

1st,  This  argument  is  unsupported  by  analogy.  Although 
urged  by  professed  theists,  it  is  as  applicable  to  natural  religion 
as  to  revealed.  If  it  has  any  bearing  against  the  great  facts  of  th.e 
scriptural  record,  it  has  not  less  against  the  great  facts  of  the  boolc 
of  providence.  The  argument  is  an  old  and  by  no  means  an  in- 
\T.ncible  one.  The  answer  is  old  also,  and,  in  our  estimation,  a 
truly  satisfactory  one.  The  gist  of  the  argument  is,  that  God  must 
always  act  in  accordance  vnth  the  simple  idea  of  his  pateru!:'! 
character;  and  that  the  doctrines  of  redemption,  militating,  as  is 
alleged,  against  that  idea,  cannot  in  their  orthodox  sense  be  true 
Carrying  along  with  us,  then,  the  simple  and  exclusive  idea  of  pa- 
ternity, suppose  that  from  the  date  of  our  creation  we  had  dvv'elt 
in  another  region  of  God's  empire  where  sin  and  misery  were  un- 
known, where  knowledge  of  the  most  delightful  kind  was  dilfiused 
wide  as  the  hght,  and  where  all  the  inhabitants  were  perfectly 
holy  and  happy.  Suppose,  farther,  that  we  had  known  nothing, 
by  report  or  otherwise,  of  the  moral  and  physical  condition  of  this 
earth,  but  that  at  a  certain  period  we  alighted  on  its  soil  and 
mingled  with  its  children ;  would  we  not  have  found  much  in  the 
condition  of  mankind  irreconcileable  with  the  simple  and  exclusive 
idea  of  the  paternity  of  God?  We  are  far  from  believing  tliat 
there  is  any  part  of  the  wide  universe,  however  sinless  and  happy, 
the  inhabitants  of  which  have  no  other  idea  of  the  Eternal  than 
that  of  a  Father.  The  idea  of  paternity  is  of  all  others  the  most 
dehghtful,  and,  in  such  a  province  of  the  Creator's  dominions  as 
that  supposed,  v»'iil  be  most  vivid.  But  it  is  not  all-comprehen- 
ding. It  is  a  glory  that  blends  with  other  glories  in  the  Divine 
character,  and  the  idea  will  consequently  be  associated  with  other 
ideas  in  the  minds  of  those  beings  who  have  the  most  enlarged 
and  correct  knowledge  of  God.  But,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  we 
suppose  ourselves  to  have  lived  in  some  remote  happy  region,  and 
then,  bringing  along  with  us  the  exclusively  vivid  idea  of  pater- 
nity, to  have  come  into  tiiis  v/orld  ;  and  we  ask,  how  much  in  iis 
condition  would  we  not  have  found  apparently  at  variance  with  it  ? 

There  is  the  palpable  fact  of  moral  evil  meeting  us  at  every  step, 
a  fact  which,  however  much  men  may  attempt  to  disguise  or  miti- 
gate it,  cannot  be  denied.  The  existence  of  this,  in  any  part  of 
the  earth,  would  be  to  us  a  monstrous  anomaly,  and  conflict  migh- 
tily with  our  exclusive  idea  of  the  Divine  paternity.  Much  moil 
would  this  happen,  when  we  ascertained  that  it  was  neither  Iocs! 
nor  temporary,  that  traces  of  it  were  to  be  found  wherever  ma:l 
set  his  foot,  and  that  it  had  been  perpetuated  from  generation 
to  generation  ever  since  the  existence  of  the  first  family.  Hen  •. 
we  might  say,  is  a  phenomenon,  which,  judging  from  our  notion 


120  SPIRITUALISM  ;    OK,    TIIK    DENIAL 

of  the  paternal  character  of  the  Divine  dispensations,  we  would 
never  have  expected.  And  how  account  for  the  permission  at  first, 
and  for  the  prevalence  hitherto,  of  this  dreadful  evil  in  a  vrorld 
under  the  supreme  control  of  Him  whom  we  have  been  accustomed 
to  regard  as  the  Father  of  his  creation,  the  wisest  and  best  Father 
of  his  people? 

Then  again,  there  is  the  moral  nature  of  man,  speaking  clearly, 
by  its  in-imitive  judgments,  on  behalf  of  truth  and  rectitude,  and 
yet  ever  in  love  with  error  and  swerving  from  the  right  path.  The' 
human  soul  declaring,  by  the  wondrous  natural  powers  with 
which  it  has  been  endowed,  that  it  is  celestial  in  its  origin ;  and 
yet  making  it  evident,  by  the  manifestation  of  these  powers,  that 
it  is  allied  to  the  dust.  This  is  what  Ave  never  would  have  anti- 
cipated under  the  government  of  Him  who  is  the  Father  of  spirits. 
And,  as  we  travelled  through  this  world,  or  read  its  history  in  past 
ages,  and  became  acquainted  with  the  ignorance,  the  irreligion, 
and  suffering  that  prevailed,  our  preconceived  notions_  would  be 
the  more  scattered,  and  our  exclusive  idea  of  paternity  be  brought 
the  more  into  conflict  with  actual  realities.  Here  aiul  there,  we 
would  perceive  a  few  minds,  like  tall  trees  studding  at  intervals  a 
level  tract  of  country,  rising  by  their  intelligence  and  attainments 
above  the  crowd;  wliile  the  greater  part  of  that  crowd  were  gi'o- 
velling,  ignorant,  sensual.  The  perplexities  would  increase,  and 
the  gloom  thicken  upon  us,  as  we  proceeded  to  consider  the  reli- 
gious condition  of  mankind  in  general.  Here,  on  an  insignificant 
spot  of  the  world's  map,  would  we  behold  a  small  portion  of  the 
race  possessiug  any  thing  like  worthy  conceptions  of  God;  and, 
even  among  these,  an  ever  manifesting  tendency  to  corrupt  that 
knowledge  and  to  depart  from  Him  ;  while,  in  reference  to  the  rest, 
we  would  find  tlie  description  of  the  sacred  oracle  to  be  by  no 
means  exaggerated,  "  darkness  covered  the  earth,  and  gross  dark- 
ness the  people." 

The  darkness  would  become  the  more  visible,  and  the  anomalies 
the  more  bewildering,  on  noticing  the  moral  and  physical  suffer- 
ing that  prevailed.  What  a  vast  and  varied  amount  of  mental 
and  bodily  distress  meets  the  eye  in  this  direction  and  in  that ! 
The  thirst  for  happiness  is  insatiable,  the  cry  is  deep,  earnest,  and 
incessant,  "who  will  show  us  any  good?"  The  yearnings  and 
strivings  of  the  human  spirit  indicate  that  hap]uness  is  •'  our 
being's  end  and  aim,"  —  and  yet  men  in  general  fail  of  attaining 
to  it.  The  moral  viciousness  of  individuals  and  communities  has 
its  counterpart  in  dreadful  and  complicated  sufferings.  Here,  we 
see  physical  ills  following  moral  transgressions  with  something 
like  the  certainty  of  fixed  laws ;  and  there,  we  behold  ever  and 
anon  in  history,  terrible  special  interpositions  in  the  form  of 
famine  or  flood,  pestilence  or  war,  proclaiming  to  those  who  have 
cars  to  hear,  that  there  is  verily  a  God  that  judgelh  in  the  earth 


OF    THE    BIBLE    iif.DEMPTlON  121 

The  innocent  are  involved  in  these  calamities,  as  well  as  the  guilty. 
The  sins  of  the  fathers  are  visited  npon  the  children.  The  good 
and  heneficent  are  not  unfrequently  overwhelmed  in  the  same 
national  judgments  that  come  upon  the  evil-doers  and  the  profane. 

This  is  a  state  of  matters,  a  complicated  scene  of  ignorance  and 
irreligion,  of  moral  and  physical  suffering,  which  the  inhabitants 
of  a  sinless  world,  having  a  vivid  idea  of  the  paternity  of  God, 
would  have  found  on  their  arrival,  (until  the  explanation  was 
given,)  to  be  awfully  and  distressingly  embarrassing.  And,  had  it 
been  possible  for  such  intelligences  to  have  had  no  otber  idea  of 
God  but  the  paternal  one,  they  would  have  learned  that  some  other 
must  be  embraced,  and  that  between  tliem  there  was  the  most 
perfect  harmony.  Here,  then,  we  meet  the  objection  against  the 
doctrines  of  the  Christian  redemption,  urged  on  the  gi'ound  of  tbeir 
supposed  contrariety  to  the  paternal  character  of  God.  The 
objector  says,  the  atonement  and  the  system  of  which  it  forms  the 
centre,  are  utterly  at  vai'iance  with  what  we,  judging  from  his 
character  as  a  father,  would  have  supposed  God  to  have  done  had 
He  interjjosed  on  behalf  of  the  human  race.  We  ask  the  objector, 
is  that  world  without  and  around  you  such  as  you  would  have 
supposed  it  would  be  ?  Had  you  come  from  another  sphere  with 
no  other  idea  about  God  in  your  head  than  the  paternal  one,  would 
you  have  expected  to  have  found  that  mysterious  and  mighty  thing, 
moral  evil,  at  the  heart  of  humanity,  perpetuating  and  difiusing 
itself  from  age  to  age,  and  bringing  in  its  train  such  an  amount  of 
moral  and  physical  wretchedness  as  has  inscribed  on  the  world's 
history,  mourning,  and  lamentation,  and  woe?  We  ask  you  to 
reconcile  that  fact,  which  is  patent  to  every  eye,  with  your  pre- 
conceived notions  of  the  paternity  of  God ;  and  we  tell  you,  that 
you  could  no  more  ward  off  the  objection  which  the  supposed 
visitant  might  bring  against  the  condition  of  our  world,  than,  as 
you  suppose,  it  can  be  warded  ofl'  from  the  doctrines  of  the  Chris- 
tian redemption. -1= 

2nd.  The  view  of  the  Divine  character  taken  by  this  argument, 
is  one-sided  and  jJartial.  It  embraces  a  delightful  and  important 
truth,  but  it  is  not  the  whole  truth,  nor  the  whole  of  tlie  most 

*  Harrington  the  sceptic,  who  had  been  prevented  from  taking  refuge  in  the 
"half-way  houses"  between  the  Bible  and  religious  scepticism,  says:  "If  I 
acquiesce,  on  Mr.  Newman's  grounds,  in  the  rejection  of  the  Bible  as  a  special 
revelation  of  God,  I  am  compelled  on  the  very  same  principles  to  go  a  few  steps 
further,  and  to  express  doubts  of  the  absolutely  divine  original  of  the  World,  and 
the  administration  thereof,  just  as  he  does  of  the  divine  original  of  the  Bible.  If 
I  concede  to  Mr.  Newman,  however  we  may  differ  as  to  the  moral  and  spiritual 
faculties  of  man.  that  these  are  yet  the  sole  and  ultimate  court  of  appeal  to  us; 
that  from  onr  '  intuitions'  of  rigiit  and  wrong,  of '  moral  and  spiritual  truth,'  be 
they  more  perfect  according  to  him,  or  more  rudimentary  and  imperfect  according 
to  me,  we  must  form  a  judgment  of  the  moral  bearings  of  every  presumed  external 
revelation  of  God,  I  cannot  do  otherwise  than  reject  much  of  the  revelation  of  God 
in  his  presumed  Wo7-hs  as  unwortliy  of  him,  just  as  Mr.  Newman  does  very  much 
in  his  supposed  Word  as  equally  unworthy  of  him." — The  Eclipse  of  Faith, 
p.  147. 


12-i  sPirviTUALTSM ;  on,  the  denial 

important  truth.  God  is  the  common  father  of  all  his  creatures. 
"  Have  we  not  all  one  father,  hath  not  one  God  created  us  ?"  And 
it  is  in  this  character,  that  He  opens  his  hand,  and  satisjfies  the 
desires  of  every  living  thing.  The  child  feels  the  sweet  power  of 
this  truth,  when,  with  hended  knee  and  uj)lifted  heart  and  look,  he 
says,  "our  Father  which  art  in  heaven."  The  man  of  feeling, 
casting  his  eye  over  the  varied  face  of  nature,  is  moved,  and  justly 
so,  at  the  thought  of  that  immense  paternity  which  embraces 
heaven  and  earth,  and  the  whole  empire  of  animated  being  from 
the  seraph  to  the  reptile.  And  the  Christian  has  been  taught,  by 
the  holy  oracles,  to  look  upon  God  as  being  in  the  highest  sense 
his  Father,  and  as  thus  making  all  things  work  togetlier  for  his 
good.  But  the  regal  character  pertains  no  less  to  the  Divine 
Being  than  does  the  parental ;  and  nature  and  revelation  teach  us 
to  regard  Him  as  a  Sovereign  no  less  than  a  Parent.  The  two 
ideas  blend  together,  and  are  realized,  in  the  utmost  perfection,  in 
the  Divine  naWe  ;  and  so  should  they  blend  in  our  conceptions 
of  what  God  is,  and  of  what  are  his  relations  to  our  world.  He  is 
not  only  the  best  and  wisest  of  fathers,  but  the  most  righteous, 
benignant,  and  powerful  of  kings.  The  same  dispensation  of 
Pro^uden3e  may  bring  impressively  before  our  mind  this  two-fold 
view  of  the  Divine  relation.  Afflictions,  in  one  sense,  are 
sovereign  judgments;  and,  in  another  sense,  they  are  fatherly 
chastisements.  In  one  view,  they  are  punishments  for  sin ;  and, 
in  another  view,  they  are  tokens  of  a  father's  love.  They  manifest 
at  once  the  righteous  Sovereign  and  the  benignant  Parent.  Jus- 
tice has  been  defined  to  be  goodness  regulated  by  wisdom,  and  the 
sovereign  relation  may  be  said  to  be  the  parental  controlled  by  the 
same  attribute.  It  would,  however,  be  a  very  defective  view  of  the 
Divine  character,  to  exclude  the  idea  of  justice,  and  adopt  the  bare 
idea  of  goodness,  as  comprehensive  of  the  whole  truth  about  God. 
And  it  is  the  very  same  defect  in  that  theory  which  regards  Him 
simply  and  exclusively  as  the  Parent  of  all.  It  is  a  gross  mis- 
representation of  the  Christian  atonement,  to  speak  of  it  as  if  the 
fatherly  character  of  God  was  there  overshadowed  or  shut  out. 
"  Go  to  my  brethren,"  said  the  Apostle  and  High  Priest  of  our 
profession,  "  and  say  unto  them,  I  ascend  unto  my  Father  and 
yoiu'  Father;  and  to'my  God  and  your  God."  It  is,  indeed,  in  the 
atonement,  that  we  see  the  paternal  relation  in  its  richest  elements 
and  loveliest  manifestation,  not  dissociated  from  or  shrouded  by 
the  regal,  but  the  nmjesty  of  the  one  rendered  attractive  by  the 
love  of  the  other,  and  the  love  of  the  one  appearing  the  more  grand 
and  costly  in  union  with  the  other.  "Mercy  and  truth  meet 
together,  righteousness  and  peace  embrace  each  other."  We 
behold  at  once,  "  the  just  God  and  the  Saviour."  The  theology  of 
the  natural  religion  is  no  less  meagre  and  contracted  than  that  of 
the  revealed,  and  the  view  of  the  Divine  character  as  the  God  of 


OF   THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTTON.  i.-^e 

providence,  is  no  less  partial  tlian  the  view  of  Him  as  the  God  of 
redemption,  which  does  not  embrace  the  two-fold  relationship  of 
Jehovah  as  the  King  and  Father  of  his  people.  Whether  we 
contemplate  Him  as  seated  on  the  circle  of  the  universe,  presiding 
over  the  movements  of  the  spheres,  and  managing  tlie  aifairs  of 
men;  or,  as  manifested  in  the  cross,  magnifying  his  law  and 
bringing  redemption  to  a  lost  world ;  we  do  not  contemplate  Him 
aright,  unless  it  be  in  the  blended  relations  of  the  righteous 
Sovereign  and  the  benignant  Parent.  "The  Lord  reigneth ;  let 
the  earth  rejoice ;  let  the  multitude  of  isles  be  glad  thereof.  Clouds 
and  darkness  are  round  about  Him ;  righteousness  and  judgment 
are  the  habitation  of  his  throne." 

3rd.  The  doctrine  of  depravity,  as  stated  in  Scripture  or  im- 
plied in  the  atonement,  is  not  a  ^^■hit  more  aggravated  and 
mysterious  than  the  actual  condition  of  man.  The  Bible  doctrine, 
on  this  subject,  has  been  denounced  as  dark  and  jDerplexing;  but 
it  is  not  more  so  than  the  palpable  facts  that  come  under  observa- 
tion and  experience.  To  hear  some  men  speak  about  the  dark  and 
mysterious  doctrines  of  Scripture,  you  would  imagine  that,  without 
the  pale  of  Christianity,  difficulty  and  darkness  were  unknown,  that 
all  was  unclouded  sunshine,  comprehensible  and  plain.  Whereas, 
it  is  just  because  there  are  mysteries  in  natm'e,  that  there  are 
mysteries  in  revelation.  No  one  disputes  the  existence  of  sin  in  the 
world.  The  moimtain  stands  before  us,  however  different  may  be 
the  estimates  formed  of  its  origin  and  size.  But  some  would 
represent  its  existence  in  nature,  and  account  for  its  presence  in 
the  human  soul,  in  such  a  way  as  to  set  the  natural  religion  over 
against  the  revealed.  The  conflict  takes  place  at  two  points.  The 
Bible  teaches  that  sin  is  an  element  of  positive  evil  in  the  heai't, 
consisting  in  the  corruption  of  the  will,  and  that,  as  a  depraved 
force,  it  affects  all  the  mental  powers,  and  manifests  itself  in  the 
outward  conduct.  Opponents  consider  sin  as  a  negative  thing, 
consisting  rather  in  the  defect  of  a  positive  good  than  in  the 
presence  of  a  positive  evil.  The  Bible  traces  all  human 
transgression  up  to  the  inward  depraved  principle,  which  is 
strengthened  and  developed  by  outward  circumstances.  The 
objectors,  maintaining  the  original  goodness  of  the  heart,  regard 
sin  as  an  accident,  and  the  product  of  external  forces  acting  upon 
man's  constitution.  There  it  is,  however,  in  the  heart  of  humanity, 
account  for  it  as  you  will. 

The  first  thing  we  affirm  respecting  it  is,  that  it  is  not  repre- 
sented more  darkly  in  Scripture  tlian  it  exists  actually  in  the  world. 
There  is  not  a  darker  picture  of  depravity  in  the  Bible,  than  that 
which  is  drawn  by  Paul  in  his  epistle  to  the  llomaus.  He  there 
woves,  by  an  induction  of  evidence,  that  mankind  are  deeply  and 
aniversally  depraved.  And  the  testimonies  of  historians,  who 
were  by  no  means  friendly  to  Christianity,  may  be  appealed  to  in 


124  sriRiTUALisM;  or,  the  denial 


proof  that  the  apostolic  description  is  not  darker  than  the  outward 
reality.  Experience  and  observation  are  in  perfect  harmony  with 
scriptural  representations  on  this  point.  The  book  declares  that 
all  have  sinned,  and  the  world  sets  its  seal  to  the  statement  as 
true.  The  book  declares  that  the  heart  is  deceitfid,  and  what  man 
of  self-reflection  will  deny  it  ?  The  plague  raged  not  less  fearfully 
in  the  city,  than  Daniel  Defoe  describes  it.  The  desert  is  not  less 
arid  and  cheerless,  than  it  appears  in  the  pages  of  the  traveller. 
And  the  actual  state  of  the  moral  nature  of  man,  before  better 
influences  come  down  upon  it,  is  no  less  dark  and  dejn-aved,  than 
it  is  represented  in  scriptural  statements,  or  implied  in  the  doc- 
trine of  atonement. 

But  we  assert,  further,  that  the  Bible  account  of  the  origin  of 
sin,  however  mysterious,  is  more  in  accordance  with  fact  than 
the  view  given  in  the  opposite  argument.  'Jlie  doctrine  of  Scrip- 
ture is,  that  all  men  have  been  involved  in  the  fall  of  their  com- 
mon parent,  and  that,  in  consequence  of  the  first  sin  of  the  first 
man,  they  have  inherited  a  depraved  nature.  Not  that  men  ac- 
tually sin  without  the  concurrence  of  then-  own  will,  but  that  the 
princij^les  of  depravity  are  inherent  within  them.  This  we  hold 
to  be  more  ])hilosophically  true  than  the  explanation  that  sin  is 
an  accident,  the  result  of  external  agencies,  a  thing  not  proceeding 
from  the  soul  within  but  coming  to  it  from  without.  It  is  true 
that  we  cannot  detect  depravity  till  some  time  after  the  birth  of  an 
individual,  but  neither  can  we  detect  reason  or  the  rudiments  of  a 
moral  nature.  Tlie  child,  in  process  of  time,  however,  gives  signs 
of  the  existence  of  the  reasoning  faculty,  and  of  the  moral  consti 
tution,  and  contemporaneously  therewith,  does  it  manifest  ten- 
dencies to  evil.  Now,  as  has  been  often  remarked,  v.'e  never  ascribe 
the  existence  of  reason  and  the  moral  sense  to  education  or  to  any- 
external  influences.  They  may  develope  them,  but  they  do  not 
produce  them.  Men,  in  all  circumstances,  manifest  reason  and  a 
moral  nature ;  and  this  is  to  us  a  proof  that  they  are  inherent  in 
the  human  constitution.  Men,  in  all  circumstances,  manifest  de- 
praved affections.  These  circumstances  may  call  them  forth, 
strengthen  them,  or  even  counteract  them,  but  they  do  not  origin- 
ate them,  and  this  we  take  to  be  a  proof  of  the  existence  of  an 
original  depraved  propensity.  The  uniform  occurrence  of  moral 
actions  is  not  a  stronger  evidence  of  a  moral  nature,  than  the  uni- 
form occurrence  of  wrong  moral  actions  is  an  evidence  of  a  corrupt 
moral  natm-e. 

It  is  somewhat  strange,  that  certain  reforming  projectors,  who 
persist  in  maintaining  that  inherent  depravity  is  to  be  found  now- 
here bat  in  the  "  dark  creed"  of  the  Gospel,  and  that  all  the  evils 
which  afflict  man  are  to  be  traced  to  external  circumstances  ope- 
rating on  his  mental  and  physical  constitution,  should,  on  the  sup- 
position  of  their  theory  being  true,  never  have  succeeded,  —  in 


OF  THE   BIBLE   hedemption.  125 

those  genial  climes  wbitlier  they  have  removed,  and  amid  those 
favourable  circumstances  by  Which  they  were  surrounded, — in 
rearing  up  plants  without  spot  or  wrinkle  or  any  such  thing.  They 
have  had  their  Utopias,  their  Icarias,  and  Harmony  Halls.  But 
old  Adam  has  always  proved  too  strong  for  young  Melancthon. 
The  power  of  inward  evil  has  sported  with  all  their  fondly-cher- 
ished schemes  to  subdue  it,  a,nd  shov*'n  sucli  schemes  to  be  vision- 
ary and  vain.  And,  it  is  not  less  strange,  (on  the  supposition  of 
the  truth  of  the  theories  of  Parker  and  Newman,)  that,  notwith- 
standing tbe  alleged  virtue  of  the  "  absolute  religion,"  and  the 
"  spiritual  faculty,"  which  are  said  to  render  the  Gospel  unneces- 
eary,  men,  uninfluenced  by  that  Gospel,  should  have  everywhere 
continued  corrupt  and  corrupters.  But,  it  is  not  strange,  on 
the  belief  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  that  man  is  radically  depraved, 
that  the  principle  of  evil  is  within,  and  that  out  of  the  heart  come 
tlie  things  which  defile  the  man.  Tliis  doctrine,  as  we  have 
admitted,  is  dark  and  mysterious,  standing  boldly  forth  as  it  does 
on  the  Bible  page.  But"  it  is  not  a  whit  more  so  than  the  actual 
condition  of  man  in  the  world.  The  account  of  the  astounding 
phenomenon  as  given  in  the  inspired  volume,  is,  however,  vastly 
more  in  accordance  with  observation  and  experience,  than  any 
opposite  theory.  And  we  ask,  when  are  men  of  philosophical  pre- 
tensions to  cease  assuming,  or  how  long  is  the  world  to  tolerate 
theii-  assumption,  that  darkness  and  mystery  belong  only  to  tlie 
theology'  of  the  Gospel  which  they  disown,  and  that  these  horrible 
things'have  no  place  in  the  theology  of  nature  of  which  they  pro- 
fess themselves  the  disciples  and  friends? 

4th  The  doctrine  of  jyardon  on  the  ground  of  an  atonement  is 
neither  unreasonable  nor  inconsistent  with  the  Paternity  of  God,  as 
is  supposed.  We  assent  to  the  remarks  of  the  eloquent  preacher,^): 
"  that  there  is  in  this  doctrine  something  extremely  remote  from  ordi- 
nary apprehension,  apart  from  the  instruction  derived  from  Holy 
Writ.  That  one  of  the  human  race,  by  submitting  to  an  ignominious 
and  painful  death,  should  be  the  moral  source  of  the  salvation  of  ax- 
innumerable  multitude  of  mankind,  and,  if  duly  improved,  a 
sufficient  source  for  the  salvation  of  all,  is  surely  one  of  the  most 
extraordinary  of  the  Divine  proceedings  with  regard  to  man. 
Nothing  like  this  has  ever  existed.  It  seems  to  stand  by  itself,  an 
insulated  department  of  Divine  Providence,  to  contain  williin  itself 
a  method  of  acting  which  was  never  seen  before,  and  will  never  be 
repeated."  It  was  a  mysterious  exigency,  altogether  unprecedented, 
that  had  to  be  met,  and  the  expedient  devised  by  Infinite  wisdom 
has  a  height  and  a  depth  that  pass  knowledge.  And  yet,  notwith- 
standing the  luiique  and  unparalleled  nature  of  this  distinctive  act 
of  moral  mediation,  the  idea  of  moral  substitution  has  a  founda- 

*  Eobert  Hall. 


126  spiritualism;  or,  the  denial 

tion  in  nature,  and  pardon  through  a  mediator  is  a  princii^le  nof 
unfrequently  exemplified  in  history.  Some  men  speak  under 
a  land  of  horror  at  this  doctrine,  because  it  represents  the  God  and 
Father  of  mankind  as  inflicting  punishment  on  the  innocent,  and 
thus  reversing  all  our  ideas  of  moral  rectitude  that  where  there  is 
no  sin  there  should  be  no  suffering.  B-ut,  —  not  to  dwell  on  the 
assumption  involved  in  this  objection,  that  the  objector  knew  all 
the  ends  God  Imd  in  view  in  the  work  of  atonement,  or  that  these 
ends  are  not  better  secured  by  the  sufferings  of  Christ  than  they 
coiud  have  been  in  any  other  way,  —  does  it  not  frequently  happen 
in  God's  providential  administration,  that  persons  are  involved  in 
sufferings  in  consequence  of  the  sins  of  others  in  the  commission 
of  which  they  had  no  part;  and  that  men,  possessed  of  little  or  no 
virtue  in  themselves,  have  much  respect  shown  to  them,  and  many 
benefits  conferred  upon  them,  solely  on  account  of  the  virtues  of 
others?  Some  of  the  most  direful  calamities  that  ever  fell  on 
individuals  or  communities,  have  been  the  consequences  of  the 
vrrong- doings  of  others,  of  which  they  themselves  were  innocent. 
And  some  of  the  richest  blessings  that  ever  descended  upon  fami- 
lies or  nations,  may  be  traced  to  the  merit  and  suffering  of  those 
who,  for  righteousness'  sake,  perished  in  the  field,  at  the  stake,  or 
on  the  scaffold. 

In  such  cases  as  these,  we  see  the  existence  of  a  principle,  which 
is  manifested,  in  a  mannei*  altogether  unparalleled,  in  the  Christian 
redemption,  the  prifcipls  of  moral  substitution,  the  principle  of 
confen-ing  benefitv-  'm  individuals  or  communities  from  a  regard 
to  the  merits  of  otliCTS,  and  of  the  innocent  suffering  in  consequence 
of  the  deeds  of  th^^  tiiiilty.  And,  that  this  piir-ciple  is  in  harmony 
with  the  general  sentiments  of  mankind,  is  abundantly  testified  by 
their  religious  observances  even  in  lands  where  the  Gospel  is 
unknown.  It  is  altogether  iin philosophical,  to  ascribe  any  per- 
manent and  universally  diffused  feelings  and  sentiments  to  what 
have  been  considered  a  few  interested  classes  of  the  community. 
''  To  affirm,  as  some  have  done,"  says  Isaac  Taylor,  =:=  "  that  priests 
are  the  authors  of  religion  and  moral  sentiment,  is  a  sort  of  upside- 
dovN'-n  logic,  not  easily  understood.  Surely  it  were  more  philoso- 
phical to  invert  the  terms  of  the  proposition,  and  to  affirm  that 
religion  and  moral  sentiment  are  the  authors  of  priests."  Xhe 
altars  which  have  been  reared,  and  the  sacrifices  which  have  been 
offered,  in  every  age  and  quarter  of  the  world,  show,  that  the  idea 
of  vicarious  interposition  has  its  foundation  in  the  constitution  of 
nature.  And  the  same  principle  is  evinced  in  cases,  unconnected 
with  religious  rites  and  observances,  of  the  good  and  great  in 
history  suffering  for  the  uuworthy,  and  the  virtues  of  such 
illustrious  sufferers  being  so  reckoned  to  others  as  that  on  account 

*  ^lan  Ecsponsible,  p.  8 


OF   THE    ElBLE    RELEJtPTION.  127 

of  them  undeserved  favours  have  been  bestowed.  We  never  look, 
in  anything  among  men,  for  a  parallelism  to  the  amazingly  grand 
fact  of  salvation  by  the  interposition  and  sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  the 
Highest.  But,  in  such  cases  as  those  to  which  we  have  adverted, 
v,"8  see,  be  the  actions  blameworthy  or  commendable,  thaj;  the 
notions  of  vicarious  suffering  and  of  treating  the  undeserving 
kindly  for  the  sake  of  the  deserving,  are  not  so  strange  and 
unnatural  as  some  persons,  in  objecting  to  the  atonement,  would 
seem  to  suppose. 

It  was  one  of  the  unworthy  expedients  of  the  old  deistical 
writers,  and  the  same  is  not  unfrequently  resorted  to  in  more 
modern  times,  to  misrepresent  and  disfigiu-e  the  atonement,  and 
then  hold  it  up  to  the  execration  of  mankind.  The  follov/ing  is  a 
sj)ecimen  from  Bolingbroke :  "Let  us  suppose  a  gi'eat  prince, 
governing  a  wicked  and  rebellious  people,  he  has  it  in  his  power 
to  punish  but  thinks  fit  to  pardon  them.  But  he  orders  his 
only  and  well-beloved  son  to  be  put  to  death,  to  expiate  their  sins, 
and  satisfy  his  royal  vengeance.  Would  this  proceeding  (asks  the 
writer)  appear  to  the  eye  of  reason,  and  in  the  unprejudiced  light 
of  nature,  wise,  or  just,  or  good  ?  No  man  dares  to  say  that  it 
would  except  it  be  a  divine."-:-  No  person  deserving  the  name 
of  a  divine  but  would  cry  out  on  the  monstrous  injustice  as  loudly 
as  the  philosopher  himself.  But  is  such  a  case  parallel  to  the 
Christian  atonement  ?  Far  from  it.  It  fails  in  two  things,  and 
failing  in  these,  the  whole  is  vitiated.  In  the  first  place,  the 
highest  injustice  would  have  been  done  to  the  substitute,  in  the 
case  supposed;  whereas,  no  injury  whatever  was  done  to  Christ, 
for,  with  a.  perfect  knowledge  of  what  he  would  have  to  endure,  his 
undertaking  was  entirely  voluntaiy.  He  is  represented  in  the 
ancient  oracle  as  saying,  when  about  to  enter  on  the  work  of 
mediation,  "  Lo !  I  come,  I  delight  to  do  thy  will,  O  my  God;" 
and,  on  earth  he  declared,  "  no  man  taketh  my  life  from  me. 
I  have  power  to  lay  it  down  and  I  have  power  to  take  it  again." 
In  the  second  place,  no  sentiment  is  more  derogatory  to  the  Divine 
character,  and  more  opposed  to  the  declarations  of  Scripture,  than 
that  wliich  represents  God  as  naturally  implacable  towards  the 
human  race,  and  as  being  appeased  by  the  interposition  of  his 
beloved  Son.  The  sacred  penmen,  and  the  adherents  of  the 
doctrine  of  redemption,  always  speak  of  the  mission  and  death  of 
Christ,  not  as  the  cause,  but  as  the  effect  of  the  Father's  love,  not 
as  rendering  Him  merciful  towards  us,  but  as  the  divinely 
appointed  way  of  manifesting  his  self-moved  benignity  to  the 
guilty.  What  can  be  plainer  than  the  golden  passage  in  John, 
"  God  so  loved  the  world  as  to  give  his  only  begotten  Son,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  Him  should  not  perish  but  have  everlasting 

*  LclautVs  Deistical  Vrritcrs. 


128  SPIRITUALISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

life."  The  paternal  theory,  as  we  have  seen,  embraces  only  one 
aspect  of  the  twofold  relation  in  which  the  Supreme  Being  stands 
to  men  ;  it  separates  theglones  that  blend  in  the  Divine  character, 
and  overlooks  one  of  them  as  if  it  had  no  existence.  Whereas,  it 
is  the  pre-eminent  excellence  of  the  Christian  doctrine  of  atone- 
ment, that  it  is  comprehensive  of  the  whole.  In  it,  we  see  at  once 
the  righteous  Governor  of  the  world  maintaining  the  integrity  of 
his  just  and  good  laws,  and  the  benignant  Parent,  in  perfect 
consistency  with  the  holiness  of  his  character  and  the  honour  of 
his  administration,  extending  mercy  to  his  rebellious  children. 
We  behold  in  the  theory  of  the  atonement,  wliat  we  fail  to  perceive 
in  the  paternal  theory,  a  high  regard  to  the  cause  of  moral  right 
and  to  the  general  interests  of  the  universe,  and  an  altogether 
extraordinary  manifestation  of  Divine  benevolence  to  guilty  man. 
It  speaks  loudly  in  behalf  of  its  truthfulness,  that  it  harmonizes 
so  wondrously  the  Divine  relations  of  sovereign  and  parent; 
exhibiting,  in  the  world's  great  exigency,  righteousness  inviolable 
and  imcompromising  to  be  the  girdle  of  God's  throne,  and  love, 
unexampled  and  ineffable,  going  forth  from  his  heart.  The  angels 
embraced  the  blended  glories  of  king  and  father,  when  tliey  sung 
over  the  plains  of  Bethlehem,  "  Glory  to  God  in  the  highest,  and 
on  earth  peace,  good-will  toward  men." 

But  this  is  mysterious  doctrine  !  As  if,  by  crying  up  mystery 
as  a  bugbear,  men  are  to  he  scared  away  from  it.  We  reply  to  the 
taunt  by  saying,  there  is  a  mystery  no  less  inscrutable  and  as- 
tounding before  your  eyes,  a  mystery  which  has  called  this  other 
forth  — tlie  mystery  of  moral  evil.  Solve  that  mystery,  or  deny  it, 
before  you  urge  mystery  as  an  objection  against  the  Divine  pro- 
vision that  has  been  made  to  meet  it.  It  is  tlie  mystery  of  man's 
fall  that  has  occasioned  the  mystery  of  man's  redemption. 
"  Without  controversy,  great  is  the  mystery  of  godliness ;  God 
was  manifested  in  the  flesh."  But,  "  herein  he  hath  abounded 
toward  us  in  all  wisdom  and  prudence." 

5th.  The  doctrine  of  Divine  influence  as  indispensably  necessary 
lo  regenerate  the  souls  of  men,  is  a  reasonable  doctrine ;  at  variance 
neither  with  the  dictates  of  nature  nor  the  principles  of  sound 
philosophy.  It  deserves  notice,  thac  while  the  earlier  Unitarians 
shrunk  from  boldly  impugning  this  article  of  the  evangelical  creed, 
their  successors  generally  ridicule  and  deny  it ;  or,  in  accordance 
with  the  "  School  of  Progress,"  merge  it  in  the  very  commonest 
natural  influence.  Men  may  think  to  construct  a  religious  philo- 
sophy without  it,  but  it  requires  little  consideration  to  see,  that  of 
all  philosophies  it  is  the  most  unphilosophical.  It  has  been  al- 
ready shown,  that,  to  be  thoroughly  consistent  in  denying  the 
intervention  of  God  in  ])reserving  and  ruling  the  universe,  men 
must  take  up  their  position  in  atheism  and  deny  the  existence  of 
God   Himself.     And  it  may  as  justly  be   aflirmed,  that,  to   be 


OF    THE    BIBLE    IlEDEMPTIOX.  1'2'.) 

tlioroiiglily  consistent  in  denyin"-  a  Divine  influence  on  the 
soul,  men  must  either  hold  that  the  soul  exists  indejiendently  of 
God,  or  is  placed  beyond  the  reach  of  his  operations.  The  possi- 
bility, not  to  say  the  probability  or  actual  certainty  of  the  Almighty 
]\Iaker  exerting  an  influence  on  the  material  worlds,  in  accordance 
with  the  laws  and  properties  which  He  has  impressed  on  them 
being  gi-auted;  it  cannot,  with  any  pretensions  to  philosophy,  be 
denied,  that  God  may  exercise  an  influence  on  the  souls  which  He 
has  formed,  so  as  not  to  interfere  with  their  free  agency  and  re- 
sponsibihty.  No  one  will  venture  to  assert  that  it  is  more  difficult 
to  conceive  how  the  spirit  of  God  operates  on  mind,  than  how  He 
operates  on  matter.  Yea,  we  will  venture  to  say  that  it  is  more 
easy  to  conceive  the  action  of  mind  on  mind,  than  the  action  of 
mind  on  matter.  Many  of  the  ancient  Greek  and  Roman  philo- 
sophers, as  has  often  been  shown  by  quotations  from  their  writ- 
ings, admitted  not  only  the  possibility  but  the  necessity  and  reality 
of  Divine  influences  on  the  mind  for  the  attainment  and  practice 
of  virtue.  Seneca  declares,  "  It  is  God  that  comes  to  men,  yea 
more,  He  enters  into  them,  for  no  mind  becomes  truly  good  but 
by  his  assistance."  Plato  has  remarked,  "  that  virtue  is  not  to  be 
taught  but  by  the  assistance  of  God."  And  he  introduces  Socrates 
as  declaring,  "  that  wheresoever  virtue  comes,  it  seems  to  be  the 
fruit  of  a  divine  dispensation."  These  considerations  show,  not 
only  that  the  exercise  of  a  Divine  influence  on  the  mind  is  pos- 
sible, but  that  the  want  of  it  has  been  felt,  and  the  reality  of  it 
admitted,  by  the  greatest  men  living  under  the  gliunnering  light 
of  nature.  This  augurs  something  in  favour  of  its  reason able-ness 
and  accordance  with  sound  philosophy.  And  surely,  if  we  admit 
a  supernatural  intervention  in  revealing  Christianity  at  the  first ; 
it  is  more  in  accordance  with  right  reason  to  believe,  that  it  makes 
its  way  through  this  world,  rife  as  it  is  with  powerful  principles 
that  are  hostile  to  it,  accompanied  with  an  influence  from  on  high, 
than  that  it  has  been  left  to  struggle  alone,  unaided  by  the  spiritual 
energy  which  gave  it  birth. 

Dut  the  objection  is,  that  it  interferes  with  the  moral  freedom 
of  man.  As  if  an  influence  coming  from  without  could  not  but 
destroy  or  impair  the  freedom  of  the  will  within.  It  is  a  sufficient 
reply  to  this  objection,  that  the  operation  of  such  an  external 
cause  no  more  implies  interference  with  human  liberty  than  the 
operation  of  any  other  external  causes.  One  man  exerts  an  influ- 
ence upon  another  by  his  speech  or  example,  without  it  ever 
being  supposed  that  the  moral  freedom  of  that  other  is  interfered 
with.  The  orator  in  the  senate,  or  from  the  pulpit,  influences 
men  to  change  their  opinions  and  follow  a  different  line  oi' conduct, 
and  no  one  ever  imagines  that  the  responsibility  of  men  is  thereby 
lessened.  We  are  thrown  into  society,  or  brought  into  contact 
witli  the  scenes  of  external  nature,  and  passively  receive  impres 


130  sPir.iTUALiSM ;  or,  the  denial 

sions  from  the  objects  that  sm-rouud  us,  but  ^Ye,  nevertheless,  feel 
that  our  free  v/ill  is  not  interfered  with  in  avoiding  or  pursuing 
any  train  of  thought  or  course  of  conduct  to  vdiich  they  would 
lead  us.  And  why  shoald  it  be  thought  to  be  otherwise  with  an 
influence  coming  not  from  earth  but  from  heaven,  not  from  objects 
that  are  natural  but  divine  and  spiritual?  Men,  it  has  been 
remarked,  are  passive  in  receiving  natural  light  and  bodily  strength 
from  God,  and  yet  free  and  active  in  making  use  of  them.  And 
so  it  may  be  conceived  that  men  derive  spiritual  light  and  strength 
from  the  same  source,  and  enjoy  their  moral  freedom  in  like  man- 
ner. If  it  be  objected  that  the  cases  are  not  parallel,  we  ansvrer 
that  they  are  perfectly  parallel  in  the  point  for  which  they  have 
hesii  adduced,  viz.  non-interference  with  man's  moral  liberty. 
We  are  conscious  that  the  influence  exerted  on  our  minds  by 
human  spirits,  is  according  to  the  laws  of  our  moral  constitution. 
We  feel  that  influence,  and  nevertheless  we  are  conscious  that  we 
pare  morally  free.  In  like  manner,  the  subjects  of  Divine  influ- 
ence know  that  it  is  God  that  worketh  in  tliem,  and  yet  they  feel 
;too,  that  they  are  free  to  choose  the  good  and  avoid  the  evil. 

Such  are  the  aspects  in  vrhich  the  doctrine  is  presented  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  in  that  orthodox  creed  which  is  objected  against.  It  is 
■  obviously  implied  in  those  inspired  statements  which  speak  of 
:men  resisting  and  quenching  the  Spirit's  influences,  that  these  in- 
•fiuences  do  not  in  the  least  interfere  with  man's  free  agency,  nor 
diminish  but  rather  increase  his  responsibility.  David,  conscious 
of  his  moral  freedom,  meditated  on  his  comparatively  small  and 
dark  Bible,  while  he  lifted  up  his  heart  to  the  heavens  and  said, 
"  Open  thou  mine  eyes,  that  I  may  behold  wondrous  things  out  of 
thy  lav/."  Paul  gave  the  exhortation,  "  Work  out  your  own  salva- 
tion with  fear  and  trembling,  for  it  is  God  that  worketh  in  you 
both  to  will  and  to  do  of  His  good  pleasure."  At  this  point,  then, 
the  Scripture  doctrine,  however  inscnitable  otherwise,  accords 
with  human  consciousness,  and  with  the  lorinciples  of  sound  jDlii- 
losophy.  We  attempt  not,  and  wish  not,  to  strip  it  of  its  myste- 
riousness.  But  mystery  here,  is  not  mystification.  And,  as  Dr. 
Vaugiian  remarks,=:<  "  the  mystery  is,  that  men  should  be  in  a  con- 
dition to  need  regeneration,  not,  that  such  being  the  fact,  the  Sphit 
of  the  Lord  should  be  sent  to  regenerate  them." 

In  farther  confirmation  of  the  reaUty  and  reasonableness  of  this 
doctrine,  we  appeal  to  three  unquestionable  facts.  The  first  is, 
that  where  the  Gospel  is  unknown,  men  are  morally  degraded  and 
vile.  Whether  we  look  at  the  ancient  or  modern  heathen  world, 
the  testimony  given  is  the  same,  that  men,  without  Christianity, 
are  unregenerate  and  destitute  of  moral  loveliness.  Let  any  one 
read  Tholuck's  admirable  treatise  "  on  the  Nature  and  ]Morai  In- 
iiuence  of  Heathenism,  especially  among  the  Greeks  and  liomans," 

*  The  Ago  and  Claristiani'iv,  p.  299. 


OF    THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION.  131 

and  ho  will  be  convinced,  if  imconyinced  before,  of  the  truth  of 
tbe  proposition  which  he  seeks  to  demonstrate, — that  "  heathenism 
as  such,  did  not  restore,  but  profaned  the  image  of  God  in  man." 
"  History,"  observes  Llaclaurin,';^  "  showeth  the  weak  and  con- 
temptible efficacy  of  the  sublimest  philosophy  of  the  heathens, 
when  it  is  encountered  vrith  inveterate  corruptions  or  violent  tempt- 
ations. How  many  of  them  that  spake  of  virtue  like  angels,  yet 
lived  in  a  manner  like  brutes :  whereas,  in  all  ages,  poor  Christian 
plebeians,  unpolished  by  learning,  but  earnest  in  prayer,  and  de- 
pending upon  grace,  have,  in  comparison  of  these  others,  lived 
rather  like  angels  than  men  ;  and  shown  such  an  invincible  sted- 
fastness  in  the  practice  of  virtue,  as  shameth  all  the  philosophy  in 
the  world."  Plato  represents  Socrates  as  saying  in  his  discourse 
with  Alcibiades,  "Methinks,  as  Homer  says,  that  Minerva  removed 
the  mist  from  the  eyes  of  Diomede,  in  order  that  he  might  well 
distinguish  God  from  man,  so  it  is  needful  that  He  (the  heavenly 
teacher),  first  removing  from  tliy  soul  the  mist  which  is  now  pre- 
sent, should  then  impart  means  by  which  thou  shalt  know  good 
and  evil ;  for  7iow  thou  dost  not  appear  to  me  capcMe  of  this."  And 
the  absence  of  life  in  modern  heathenism  to  renovate  and  raise 
np  man,  and  the  presence  and  power  of  it  in  the  Gospel,  are  strik- 
ingly illustrated  in  the  veritable  records  of  Christian  missions. 
''  Why  do  you  believe  in  the  Divine  origin  of  Cluistianity  ?"  said  an 
officer  of  a  13 ritish  ship  to  some  converted  islanders  of  the  South  Sea. 
"We  look,"  replied  one  of  them,  "  at  the  power  with  which  it  has 
been  attended  in  effecting  the  entire  overthrow  of  idolatry  among 
us ;  and  v/hich,  we  believe,  no  human  means  could  have  induced 
us  to  abandon."!  If,  over  against  all  this,  men  will  set  the  cor- 
ruptions, which  have  existed  in  the  presence  of  Christianity,  and 
assert  that  the  moral  pollution  within  the  pale  of  the  church  has 
not  been  less  than  within  the  province  of  heathenism,  we  reply, 
in  the  words  of  Tholuck,  that,  "The  question  is  not,  in  what  tlie 
Christian,  who  is  merely  baptized  with  water,  is  better  than  the 
heathen,  but  the  one  who  is  baptized  with  the  Spirit  and  with  fire. 
....  Yain  would  be  the  task  of  him  who  would  prove,  that  the 
mass  of  weeds  which  have  luxuriated  within  the  pale  of  the  Chris- 
tian church  from  the  beginning,  might  h.ave  sprung  from  the  root 
of  the  Spirit  of  Christ."!  It  can  be  shown  that  the  Divine  life  has 
been  wanting  wherever  a  native  or  baptized  heathenism  prevails, 
but  it  cannot  be  shown  that  a  spiritual  deadness  has  been  preva- 
lent where  the  Gospel,  in  its  purity  and  simplicity,  has  been  be- 
lieved and  obeyed.  This  of  itself  is  a  strong  presumptive  j)roof 
that  a  Divine  influence  accompanies,  in  a  greater  or  less  degi-ee, 
the  truths  of  Christianity  among  men. 

*  Maclauriu's  Works,  p.  78  (Collias's  Edition). 

+  The  Bible  not  of  'SXa.n.    By  Dr.  Spring,  p.  160. 

t  Nature  and  JMoral  Influence  of  Heathenism,  pp.  6,  7. 

K  2 


13:i 


spiritualism;  ok,  the  dental 


The  second  fact,  to  wliicli  wo  appeal,  is,  tliat  where  Christianity 
is  exhibited,  stripped  of  all  its  grand  distinctive  peculiarities  as  a 
system  of  atonement  and  spiritual  regeneration,  and  reduced  to  a 
kind  of  religious  pliilosophy,  it  is  seen  to  he  destitute  of  life  and 
morally  impotent  to  regenerate  men.  It  is  "  Christianity  in  the 
frigid  zone."  It  contains  no  elements  of  trutli  fitted  to  arouse  the 
conscience  of  the  ungodly,  or  to  interest  the  heart  of  the  virtuous. 
In  so  far  as  doctrinal  trutli  is  concerned,  it  is  negative  ratlier  than 
positive ;  and  Christianity  in  its  hands,  having  dwindled  down  to 
little  more  than  a  code  of  ethics,  is  supplied  with  no  power  to 
counteract  the  stubborn  principle  of  depravity,  and  to  infuse  a 
holy,  heavenly  life  into  the  soul.  Having  shorn  the  Gospel  of  its 
mysteries,  it  has,  in  a  great  measure,  deprived  it  of  its  strength, 
and  left  it  to  move  a  cold,  meagre,  uninfluential  thing  among  men. 
Let  it  be  carried,  accordingly,  into  the  lanes  and  hovels  of  our 
cities  where  ignorance  and  vice  hold  their  ancient  reign ;  or  let  it, 
if  it  has  the  zeal,  cross  the  seas  and  be  brought  to  bear  on  the 
malignant  and  inveterate  fonns  of  heathenism;  —  and  it  is  alike 
powerless  in  reclaiming  the  vicious,  and  in  turning  men  from  idols, 
to  sei-ve  the  living  and  true  God.  It  is  by  their  fruits  that  we 
are  to  judge  of  systems  as  well  as  of  men.  And  may  it  not  be 
asked,  (without  breach  of  charity,)  is  the  power  of  godliness  mani- 
fested, does  a  lofty,  unearthly  piety  prevail,  are  the  duties  of  re- 
ligion generally  attended  to,  do  works  of  faith  and  labours  of  love 
begin  and  progress,  do  real  conversions  to  God  and  a  radical  re- 
formation of  heart  and  life  take  place,  under  a  system  of  religious 
teaching  that  expunges  from  its  creed  the  doctrines  of  atonement 
and  Divine  influence?  Is  thei-e  not  rather  a  great  congeniality  of 
sj)irit  between  this  system  of  an  impoverished  Christianity,  and 
the  scepticism  and  indifference  of  men  who  wish  to  retain  an  out- 
ward form  of  religion,  while  destitute  of  its  inner  life  ?  Dr.  Priestley 
honestly  acloiowledged  that  infidelity  and  unitarianism  were  not 
very  far  from  each  other.  The  little  state  of  Geneva,  under  the 
predominance  of  such  principles — the  progress  of  which  afforded 
such  delight  to  D'Alembert  and  Yoltaire — was  characterized  by 
its  depravity,  its  neglect  of  public  and  domestic  religion,  and  the 
dissoluteness  of  its  manners  in  general.  And  though  the  system, 
in  the  hands  of  some  of  its  chiefs,  has  recently  begun  to  assume  a 
more  spiritual  aspect,  and  "to  represent  ihepj-ogressofmanintheG- 
logrj,"  it  is  not  the  spiritualism  of  the  revelation  that  has  come 
from  above,  but  that  of  the  idealistic  philosophy ;  and,  being  as  des- 
titute as  ever  of  the  great  distinctive  elements  of  the  Gospel,  it  is 
as  ineiTectual  to  make  men  holy  and  hai^py.  But  it  is  of  little  con- 
sequence what  shape  systems  may  assume,  or  what  name  tbeii' 
abettors  may  take, —  go  forth  as  they  may,  avowing  themselves  to 
be  religious  teachers,  so  long  as  they  have  the  corruptions  of  the 
heart  to  contend  with,  they  will  be  seen  to  be  visionary  and  power- 


OF    THE    BIBLE    BEDEMPTION.  133 

less,  and  will  leave  the  race,  as  similar  systems  have  left  it,  de- 
praved and  unrenewed,  because  they  have  not  the  Spirit.  And 
this  we  take  to  be  another  presumptive  proof  of  the  reality  and 
reasonableness  of  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence. 

The  third  fact,  to  which  we  appeal,  is,  that  wherever  the  Gospel 
has  been  influential  in  working  a  radical  change  on  masses  of 
men,  or  in  adorning  the  individual  character  with  the  beauties  of 
holiness,  strong  faith  in  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence  has 
existed  in  the  minds  of  its  teachers  and  disciples.  It  was  so  in 
the  beginning  of  the  Gospel  age.  The  whole  machinery  of  means 
had  been  completed,  the  atonement  had  been  finished,  the  apostles 
had  been  chosen  and  instructed,  the  Lord  had  risen  from  the 
grave  and  ascended  up  on  high, — but  life  in  the  wheels  w^as 
wanting,  and  no  remarkable  success  followed  tlie  movements  of 
the  moral  machinery,  till  a  supernatural  influence  came  down 
from  heaven.  The  first  teachers  of  Christianity  waited  in  expecta- 
tion of  such  an  influence.  It  descended,  according  to  the  promise 
of  their  Lord,  and  they  had  power  in  converting,  sanctifying, 
and  saving  men.  Paul  and  his  fellow-labourers  never  fail  to 
acknowledge,  in  any  distinguished  success  that  attended  their 
preaching,  the  presence  and  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  And  a 
similar  devout  recognition  of  the  regenerating  Spirit,  has  been 
made,  in  every  succeeding  epoch  of  revival  and  missionary  achiev- 
ment.  It  was  so  at  the  Eeformation  when  the  Gospel  trumpet 
sounded  anew  and  awoke  the  nations.  It  was  so  in  the  times  of 
the  good  and  brave  Puritans,  men  of  whom  the  world  was  not 
worthy,  and  who  were  instrumental  in  bringing  about  an  age  of 
strong  faith  and  reviving  earnestness.  It  was  so  in  the  age  of 
Whitfield,  and  Wesley,  and  liomaine,  men  born  to  summon  the 
dead  to  life ;  and  quicken  again  the  things  that  were  ready  to 
die.  It  has  been  so  in  the  brilliant  successes  that  have  crowned 
modern  missions,  and  in  the  times  of  refreshing  that  have  ever 
and  anon  come  upon  the  church  of  God.  The  most  honoured 
■nstruments  in  advancing  the  world's  i-egeneration  have  been 
persons  who  had  firm  faith  m  the  doctrine  of  the  regenerating 
mfiuences  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  a  like  testimony  is  obtained, 
on  perusing  the  memoirs,  or  in  mingling  in  the  society  of  eminent 
private  Christians.  The  choicest  spirits  of  our  race,  whether  in 
the  public  or  retii*ed  walks  of  life,  whether  standing  forth  before 
the  world  and  battling  with  its  vices  and  errors,  or  shedding 
noiselessly  a  hallowed  influence  in  the  domestic  circle,  have  been 
men  who  looked  up  to  God  for  the  high  life  of  the  soul,  and  for 
success  to  their  benignant  labours. 

This  doctrine  has  often  been  stigmatized  as  chimerical  and 
visionary.  But  such  epithets  ai'e  misapplied,  unless  they  are 
kept  to  brand  projects  and  systems  which  count  on  the  world's 
regeneration  while  unaccompanied  with  a  power  that  can  overcome 


loi  SillllTUALlSM  ;    OR,    THE    BEXIAL 

the  world's  depravity.  "Tlieii-  vrork,"  says  John  Foster,-:'  "is 
before  them ;  the  scene  of  moral  disorder  presents  to  tliem  the 
plagues  which  they  are  to  stop,  the  mountain  which  they  are  to 
remove^  the  torrent  which  they  are  to  divert,  the  desert  which 
they  are  to  clothe  in  verdure  and  bloom.  Let  them  make  their 
experiment,  and  add  each  his  page  to  the  humiliating  records  in 
which  experience  contemns  the  folly  of  elated  imagination."  The 
rorld's  regeneration,  meanv/hile,  goes  oil  And  it  must  go  on, 
r,'ith  the  same  system  of  moral  means,  and  accompanied  by  the 
same  heavenly  energy,  (though  it  may  be  with  greater  potency,) 
as  it  has  proceeded  hitherto,  until  the  glorious  consummation  shall 
have  come,  when  voices  in  heaven  will  be  heard  saying,  "  the 
.kingdoms  of  this  world  have  become  the  kingdoms  of  oar  Lord 
xnd  of  his  Christ." 

Gth.  The  charge  of  gloominess  vrhich  opponents  bring  against 
the  doctrines  of  redemption,  is  unfounded.  Some  men  are  inces- 
santly speaking  of  these  doctrines  as  if  they  tended  to  hang  the 
world  in  mourning,  and  to  repress  every  genial  impulse  of  the 
soul.  They  taunt  us,  in  no  measured  terms,  with  the  "  dark  and 
horrible  creed  of  depravity,"  as  if  this  article  were  a  shade  darker 
in  the  Gospel  than  in  the  book  of  nature.  The  hideous  thing  has 
its  origin  in  the  world,  not  in  the  Scripture,  and  it  is  dark  in  the 
one  just  because  it  is  dark  in  the  other.  They  taunt  us  v,dth  the 
doctrine  of  sacrifice  and  atonement  as  if  it  clothed  the  Divine 
Being  with  the  most  unamiable  attributes.  But  we  repel  the 
taunt  as  a  gross  misrepresentation,  and  maintain  the  atonement 
of  the  Gospel  to  be  the  most  illustrious  manifestation  of  Hun  who 
is  at  once  inflexibly  just,  immaculately  holy,  and  inconceivably 
kind.  They  taunt  us  with  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence  as 
implying  that  man  is  unequal  to  his  duties  and  destiny,  as  inter- 
fering vv-ith  his  moral  freedom,  and  tending  to  unnerve  all  his 
euci-gies.  But  we  reply  that  man's  moral  impotency  is  a  fact 
that  lies  within  the  range  of  observation  and  expeiience,  that 
Divine  influences  no  more  necessarily  interfere  with  his  moral 
fi-eedom  than  other  external  influences,  and  that  the  doctrine, 
scripturally  understood,  instead  of  unnerving,  rouses  and  quickens 
the  energies  with  which  man  has  been  endowed.  And  not  only 
do  the  docti-ines  of  redemption,  abstractly  considered,  falsify  the 
charge  under  consideration  ;  but  the  I'act  is  undeniable,  that  per- 
sons in  eveiy  age  who  have  yielded  themselves  up  to  the  influence 
of  these  doctrines  have  generally  been  the  best  and  happiest  of 
men  The  tree  is  known  by  its  fruits.  In  rebutting  the  charge 
of  gloominess,  then,  we  appeal  to  palpable  testimony.  The  power 
and  character  of  principles  are  especially  manifested  in  circum- 
stances of  fierce  opposition  and  severe  trial.    In  such  circumstances 

*  Fofiter's  Essays,  p.  173. 


OF    THE    BIBLE    REDEMPTION.  ]3j 

Vt'ere  the  early  Christians  placed,  men  who  were  of  one  heart  and 
.  of  one  soul  in  reference  to  the  doctrines  of  redemption,  and  to 
them  we  appeal  for  evidence  of  their  power  to  elevate  man  ahovo 
his  depraved  condition,  and  to  assimilate  him  to  the  holiness  and 
happiness  of  heaven.  They  gladly  received  the  word  —  the  word 
about  the  person  and  work  of  Him  who  had  suffered  and  died  tlie 
Just  One  in  the  room  of  the  unjust,  —  they  continued  daily  with 
one  accord  in  the  temple,  and  did  eat  their  meat  with  gladness  and 
singleness  of  heart;  they  departed  from  the  councils,  whither  they 
had  been  summoned,  rejoicing  that  they  were  counted  wortl^y  to 
suffer  for  Christ ;  in  the  prisons  into  which  they  had  been  cast, 
they  prayed  at  midnight  and  sung  praises  to  tlie  God  of  heaven  ; 
and,  of  the  generality  of  primitive  believers,  Peter  could  say,  vvhen 
speaking  of  their  Lord,  "whom  having  not  seen  ye  love,  in  whom, 
though  now  ye  see  him  not,  yet  believing,  ye  rejoice  with  joy  un- 
speakable and  fiill  of  glory."  Paul  was  no  dreaming  visionary,  no 
weak  enthusiast,  but  a  man  of  towering  intellect  and  acute  po^ver3 
of  reasoning,  and  yet  who  ever  grasped  these  doctrines  more  firmly, 
and  what  a  well  of  joy  sprung  up  within  him  under  their  influence, 
"  I  would  to  God,"  said  he  to  king  Agrippa,  "  that  not  only  thou, 
but  also  all  that  hear  me  this  day,  v.-ere  both  almost,  and  altogether, 
such  as  I  am,  except  these  bonds." 

There  have  been,  and  may  be,  many  melancholy  Christians, 
but,  passing  over  the  fact  that  all  the  melancholy  in  the  world  is 
not  to  be  found  within  the  pale  of  the  Church,  it  requires  little 
philosophy  to  perceive  that  that  melancholy  is  no  part  of  their 
Christianity.  It  may  be  resolved  into  a  natural  gloomy  tempera- 
ment, into  weak  faith,  into  partial  views  of  divine  truth,  or  into  a 
want  of  devotedness  in  the  life ;  but  the  Scripture  says,  a.nd  the 
cross  says,  '  it  is  not  in  me.'  Solemnity  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  gloom ;  seriousness  and  joy  a,re  quite  compatible..  Hume, 
sporting  on  his  death-bed,  was  liker  a  fool  than  a  philosopher. 
The  world  in  which  we  dwell  is  fitted  to  make  men  grave  and 
thoughtful.  But,  it  may  be  imhesitatingly  affirmed,  that  the 
believers  m  the  atonement  are  not  less  sensible  to  the  grand  and 
beautiful  in  nature,  and  not  less  capable  of  appropriating  to 
themselves  tlie  good  that  is  to  be  found  in  the  world,  than  any 
other  class  of  men.  Yea,  we  go  beyond  this,  in  asserting  that  the 
truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus  is  better  fitted  than  any  other  to  expand 
every  intellectual  power  and  to  purify  and  strengthen  every  moral 
feeling,  and  that,  in  the  view  of  the  mind  in  whom  it  dwells, 
creation  is  the  more  radiant  and  lovely,  and  God,  even  our  own 
God, "  sits  enthroned  on  the  riches  of  the  universe."  The  recorded 
experience  of  Jonathan  Edv^'ards  has,  in  some  degree,  been  the 
experience  of  many,  who,  being  originally  endowed  with  sus- 
ceptibilities to  receive  impressions  from  external  nature,  have  had 
the  eyes  of  their  understanding  enlightened  at  the  foot  of  the  cross 


130  INDIFFERENTISM  :    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

But  we  appeal  specially  to  it  as  an  illustration  of  a  mind,  second 
to  none  in  acuteness  and  vigour,  holding  with  a  strong  faith  the 
doctrines  of  redemption  in  what  some  men  count  all  their 
repulsiveness,  and  yet  sunning  himself,  as  it  Avere,  amid  the  light 
and  beauty  of  God's  world.  "The  aj)pearance  of  every  thing," 
says  he,  in  speaking  of  the  influence  produced  on  his  mind- by  the 
clearer  views  which  he  had  obtained  of  the  work  of  Christ,  "  the 
appearance  of  eveiything  was  altered;  there  seemed  to  be,  as  it 
were,  a  calm,  sweet  cast,  or  appearance  of  divine  glory,  in  almost 
every  thing.  God's  excellency,  his  wisdom,  his  purity,  and  love, 
seemed  to  appear  in  every  thing;  in  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  in 
the  clouds,  and  blue  sky;  in  the  grass,  flowers,  and  trees;  in  the 
water,  and  all  natiu-e ;  which  used  greatly  to  fix  my  mind.  I  often 
used  to  sit  and  view  the  moon  for  along  time,  and  in  the  day  spent 
much  time  in  viewing  the  clouds  and  sky,  to  behold  the  sweet 
glory  of  God  in  these  things  ;  in  the  mean  time  singing  forth,  with 
a  low  voice,  my  contemplations  of  the  Creator  and  Eedeemer." 

"'  He  looks  abroad  into  the  varied  field 
Of  nature,  and,  though  poor  perhaps,  compared 
With  those  whose  mansions  glitter  in  his  sight, 
Calls  the  delightful  scenery  all  his  own. 
His  are  the  mountains,  and  the  valleys  his, 
And  the  resplendent  rivers.     His  to  enjoy 
With  a  propriety  that  none  can  feel, 
But  who,  with  filial  confidence  inspired, 
Can  lift  to  heaven  an  unpresumptuous  eye. 
And  smiling  say— My  Father  made  them  all:" 


CHAPTER  Y. 

THE    DENIAL    OF    MANS   UESrONSIBILITY ;    OR,   IXDIFFEKENTISM. 

A  diluted  kind  of  scepticism— Not  necessarily  implying  open  hostility  to  the 
generally-received  body  of  truth—  A  weakened  sense  of  responsibility,  or  an 
actual  denial  of  it,  lies  at  the  bottom  of  indifi"erentism— Indiffereutism  on  the 
Continent— Remarks  of  Dr.  Krummacher—  Continental  Churches  —  Character- 
izes much  of  our  o\\ti  literature  — Man's  responsibility  for  his  dispositions, 
opinions,  and  conduct,  maintained:— A  matter  of  consciousness  —  Rests  on  the 
fact  of  man's  free  agency  — Measured  by  ability  and  privilege  —  Remains  inde- 
structible amid  all  objections  from  original  temperament  and  external  influences 
—  Phrenology— Case  of  Alexander  the  Sixth  — Men  individually,  and  societies 
in  general,  advance  morally,  in  proportion  as  the  sense  of  responsibility  is  high. 

In  this  case,  no  hostile  attitude  to  the  generally-received  body  of 
truth  may  be  taken.  The  doctrines  respecting  the  Divine  exist- 
ence, personality,  providential  government,  and  the  Bible  redemp- 
tion, may  theoretically  be  admitted,  but  there  is  a  want  of  stern 
fidelity  to  these  doctrines.  The  truth  is  not,  like  a  fortress,  stoutly 
assailed  and  bravely  defended.  But  it  happens,  either  that  those 
who  are  without  pass  by  and  turn  toward  it  a  look  of  indiflerence ; 
or  that  some  of  its  professed  guardians  would  shake  hands  alike 


OF  man's  eespomsibility.  137 

with  friends  and  foes,  persuade  them  that  their  variance  is  a  mere 
trifle,  and  receive  the  one  as  well  as  the  other  within  the  citadel. 
The  man  does  not  go  forth  before  us  fully  equipped  and  boldly- 
defying  the  armies  of  the  living  God,  but  he  shouts  for  a  truce,  al- 
leges that  mere  matters  of  opinion  are  not  worth  contending  for, 
and  that  a  man  is  no  more  responsible  for  his  belief  than  he  is 
for  the  colour  of  his  skin  or  the  height  of  his  stature.  This  diluted 
kind  of  scepticism  is  large  in  its  toleration.  Not  attaching  much 
importance  to  any  kind  of  religious  belief,  it  is  indulgent  towards 
aU.  It  cares  not  to  assail  by  argument,  or  otherwise,  this  creed 
or  that;  and  it  cares  as  little  about  defending  what  it  may  have 
adopted  as  its  own.  It  says,  leave  me  alone  to  the  indulgence  of 
my  opinion,  and  I  will  leave  you  to  the  indulgence  of  yours.  Dif- 
ferent forms  of  religious  belief  are  much  the  same  in  itsestimation, 
as  the  difterent  shaped  or  different  coloured  coats  v>diicli  men  wear. 
And  it  is  disposed  to  think  that  the  one  sits  with  as  little  respon- 
sibility on  the  conscience  as  the  other  does  on  the  back.  It  will 
stand  up  resolutely  for  a  political  creed,  and  unsparingly  denounce 
its  opposite ;  it  will  have  its  favourite  theory  in  science,  and  argue 
keenly  for  it  against  every  other;  it  will  be  engrossed  with  its  land 
or  merchandise,  and  sufler  nothing  to  interfere  with  the  most  in- 
tense devotion  thereto.  Bat  it  has  no  zeal  to  spend  on  religious 
opinions,  it  has  no  article  in  theology  so  dear  as  to  muster  up  an 
argument  in  its  defence,  and  it  will  suffer  itself  to  be  engrossed 
with  any  thing  or  every  thing  rather  than  with  the  system  of  truth 
which  it  professes  to  believe.  It  is  indifferent  itself  toward  religion, 
and  it  cares  little  what  quiet  shape  it  may  assume  in  others. 
Gibbon,  speaking  of  the  paganism  of  ancient  Eome,  says,  "  the 
various  modes  of  worship  which  prevailed  in  the  Eoman  world 
Vv^ere  all  considered  by  the  people  as  equally  true,  by  the  pliiloso- 
})her  as  equally  false,  and  by  the  magistrate  as  equally  useful." 
The  comment  of  some  one  is,  "  after  eighteen  centuries  of  the 
Gospel,  yye  seem  imhappily  to  be  coming  back  to  the  same  point." 
A  very  weakened  sense  of  responsibility,  or  an  actual  denial  of 
it,  lies  at  the  bottom  of  that  indifferentism  which  is  so  extensively 
prevalent  in  the  present  age.  On  the  Continent,  especially  in 
Germany  and  France,  not  only  are  opinions  destructive  of  the 
sense  of  responsibility  widely  diffused  among  the  masses,  but  in 
the  case  of  vast  multitudes,  who  would  not  w^ish  to  be  counted 
the  foes  of  Christianity,  there  is  an  utter  absence  of  anything  like 
tlie  religious  obligation  of  belief.  This  state  of  matters — the 
showing  a  kind  of  civil  deference  to  religion  while  utterly  heedless 
of  the  obligation  which  rests  upon  the  individual  conscience  in 
reference  to  religion  itself — exists  among  all  classes  fi-om  the 
liigher  ranges  to  the  low  levels  of  society.  "We  find  especially," 
savs  Dr.  Krummacher,  speaking  of  Germany,  "  an  indifference  to 
all  that  is  called  religion  in  that  mass  of  people  with  whom  care 


138  I^•DIF^EPvE^•TISM ;  or.,  thk  l>enial 

and  anxiety  for  daily  bread  exists.  In  this  so-called  proletariat, 
particularly  in  large  towns,  this  indifference  often,  borders  on 
animal  stnpidity ;  the  material  wants  fill  the  whole  soul.  .  .  . 
Tlie  number  of  the  indifferent  are,  however,  unhappily  not  less 
in  the  circles  of  the  well-instructed,  and  particularly  among  Stato 
functionaries.  Besides  that  time  which  is  necessary  for  the  fulfil- 
ment of  their  official  duties,  they  have  but  barely  sufficient  left  for 
the  more  trivial  dissipations  which  they  find  in  literary  and  poli- 
tical lectures,  and  in  social  intercourse.  In  regard  to  all  higher 
interests,  Pilate's  question  reigns  — 'What  is  truth?'  They 
believe  that  they  are  able  to  infer  from  the  religious  controversy, 
by  which  they  are  on  all  sides  surrounded,  that  in  the  region  of 
supernatural  things  nothing  certain  is  to  be  learned.  They  there- 
fore consider  it  wiser  not  to  enter  upon  their  consideration,  and 
passively  to  await  what  is  once  to  be  revealed  as  truth  or  as  a 
lovely  dream.""<  This  picture  is  too  true  a  description  of  other 
parts  of  Europe  besides  Germany.  It  is  obvious  that  such  a  state 
of  tliLngs  can  only  consist  with  an  avowed  re'jection  or  with  the 
very  faintest  recognition  of  the  principle  that  man  is  responsible 
for  his  religious  belief. 

Indifferentism  as  to  the  real  import  of  evangelical  truth — the 
result,  it  may  be,  of  a,n  indiscriminate  recognition  of  widely-dif- 
fering cliurches  by  the  political  powers — is  sadly  prevalent  in 
some  of  the  continental  religious  bodies  at  the  present  day.  It  is 
no  uncommon  thing,  to  find  men  of  all  shades  of  opinion,  fi-om 
simple  deism  up  to 'the  dry  skeleton  of  an  orthodox  creed,  blended 
together  as  parts  of  the  same  professedly  Christian  church.  Eecent 
events  have  shown  an  unwillingness,  on  the  x;)art  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical authorities,  to  moot  the  subject  of  a  confession  grounded  in 
its  details  on  the  law  and  the  testimony,  and  to  insist  on  a  per- 
sonal adherence  to  the  articles  of  evangelism  as  an  indispensable 
condition  of  membership.  The  liking  of  some  of  the  continental 
Protestant  chiu'ches  for  a  coat  of  many  colours  has  long  been 
evinced ;  and  the  same  ecclesiastical  robe  is  made  to  cover  the 
man  whose  Christianity  consists  merely  in  a  bare  recognition  of 
the  New  Testament  and  a  respect  for  Jesus  as  a  better  moral 
teacher  than  Socrates,  and  the  man  who  professedly  holds  the 
divinity  of  Christ,  the  atonement,  and  the  regenerating  influence 
of  the  Spirit.  This  state  of  things  indicates  an  enfeebled  sense  of 
responsibility,  or  the  existence,  somewhere,  of  the  notion  that 
religious  belief  is  not  a  matter  of  personal  obligation  for  which  wo 
are  "accountable  to  God.  It  was  against  such  indifferentism  that 
Ardnt,  Sponer,  Bengel,  Franke,  and  others,  lifted  up  _  their 
voice  in  the  two  preceding  centuries.  And  on  the  side  of  a  spiritual 
Christianity,  of  a  sound  doctrinal  faith,  and  man's  responsibility 

*  The  Religious  Condition  of  Christendom  (1852),  p.  423. 


OF  man's  responsibility.  ISD 

for  tlie  same,  have  their  ilkistrioiis  successors,  Tlioluck,  Kengsten- 
berg,  Mtiller,  Neander,  D'Aubigne,  Monod,  and  others,  fought 
Taliantly  in  our  own  times. 

This  vague  sort  of  infidelity,  sometimes  associated  with  a  pro- 
fessed respect  for  Clnist  and  the  Scriptures,  and,  at  other  times, 
allied  with  unbelief  in  some  of  its  bolder  forms,  is  often  to  be  met 
with  in  the  workshops,  and  in  the  higher  circles  of  our  own  land. 
It  has  not  lacked  advocacy  on  the  part  of  some  vvdiose  position  and 
talents  give  them  influence.  It  is  stated,  or  implied,  in  much  of 
ciu-  current  popular  literature,  that  a  man's  creed  does  not  depend 
upon  himself  This  dogma  pervades  the  writings  of  Mr.  Emerson,^?: 
Napoleon,  one  of  his  "  representative  men,"  of  whom  he  tells 
"  horiible  anecdotes,"  must  not,  in  his  view,  "be  set  down  as  cruel; 
but  only  as  one  who  knew  no  impediment  to  his  will."  He  de- 
picts him  as  an  "  exorbitant  egotist,  who  narrovred,  impoverished, 
and  absorbed  the  power  and  existence  of  those  who  served  him ;" 
and  concludes  by  saying,  "  it  was  not  Bonaparte's  fault "  He  thus 
condemns  and  acquits  in  the  same  breath,  sends  forth  from  the  same 
fountain  sweet  water  and  bitter.  Mr.  Theodore  Parker  makes  each 
form  of  religion  that  has  figured  in  the  history  of  the  world,  "na- 
tural and  indispensable."  "It  could  not  have  been  but  as  it  was." 
And,  therefore,  he  fi.nds  trutli,  or  the  "  absolute  religion,"  in  all  forms; 
"  all  tending  towards  one  great  and  beautiful  end."f  Of  course, 
the  idea  of  the  religious  obligation  of  belief  resting  upon  the  indi- 
vidual conscience,  is  here  quite  out  of  question.  My.  F.  W. 
Newman,  v/ho  is  so  fond  of  parting  off  things  that  most  men 
connect  together,  vv^ould  persuade  us  that  tliere  may  be  a  true  faith 
without  a  true  belief,  as  if  the  emotional  part  of  our  nature  was 
independent  of  the  intellectual.  "  Relief,"  says  he,  "  is  one  thing, 
and  faith  another."  And  he  complains  of  those  who,  on  religious 
gi'ounds,  are  alienated  from  him  because  he  has  adopted  "intel- 
lectual conclusions"  different  from  theirs — "the  difference  between 
them  and  him"  turning  merely  "  on  questions  of  learning,  history, 
criticism,  and  abstract  thought.";  The  philosophy  is  as  bad  here 
as  the  theology.  In  the  view  of  common  sense  and  Scripture,  a 
living  faith  is  as  the  doctrine  believed.  But  Mr.  Newman,  in 
common  with  Mr.  Parker  and  others,  can  lay  down  his  offensive 
weapons  when  he  wills,  and  take  up  a  position  on  the  low  ground 
of  indifference  as  to  religious  belief.  Then,  creeds  become  matters 
of  mere  jnoonshine,  and  responsibility  is  regaixled  as  a  fiction 
invented  by  priests.  This  is  part  of  the  bad  theology  of  Mr. 
Bailey's  "  Festus,"  as  we  formerly  noticed.  The  hero  of  the  poem 
is  made  to  say  :  — 

"  Yet  ment  oi-  drmerit  none  I  see 
In  nature,  liuman  or  mateiii.l, 

*  Emerson's  Representatiye  Men,  pp.  114,  127. 
+  Pavlcers  Discourse,  p.  81.  »  Phases  of  Faith  Preface. 


I-IO  indiffeeentism;  oe,  the  denial 

In  passions  oi-  affections  goocl  or  bad, 

We  only  know  tliat  God's  best  purposes 

Are  oftenest  brought  about  by  dreadest  si:;9. 

Is  thunder  evi',  or  is  dew  divine  ? 

Does  virtue  lie  in  sunshine,  sin  in  stern-.  ? 

Is  not  each  natural,  each  nee.lful,  best  ?"* 

Aiicl,  to  come  down  to  the  lower  levels  of  oitr  literature,  it  is  r^ii 
avowed  principle  of  the  Owen  or  Holyoake  school,  that  a  man 
who  does  ^vl•ong  is  not  to  be  blamed  but  pitied;  and,  if  restraint 
be  necessary,  he  must  be  restrained  like  a  wild  bull  merely  that 
society  may  be  uninjured.  Man  is  thus  degraded,  in  the  attempt 
to  set  him  free  from  the  Divine  moral  government.  And  these 
philosophers  are  every  day  acting  an  alDSurdity,  in  speaking  of 
*'  A^Tong"  or  "  bad"  actions;  since  in  their  view,  men  cannot  help 
performing  them,  and  these  actions  are  but  parts  of  one  liEU'- 
monious  whole. 

But,  to  rise  up  in  the  scale,  a  greater  name  than  any  yet  men- 
tioned has,  in  an  "  inaugural  discourse,"  lent  his  authority  to  the 
l^ernicious  doctrine  of  non-responsibility  for  belief.  Many  of  our 
ingenuous  academic  youth  were  startled,  some  years  ago,  on  hear- 
ing it  given  forth,  with  something  like  oracular  authority,  from 
the  halls  of  science,  as  a  great  truth,  that  man  has  no  control 
over  his  belief,  that  he  is  no  more  responsible  for  his  opinions, 
than  he  is  for  his  colour  or  his  height,  and  that  an  infidel  or  an 
atheist  is  to  be  pitied  but  not  blamed.  This,  we  are  persuaded,  is  a 
piece  of  flimsy  sophistry,  which  no  man  durst  utter,  and  w^hich 
would  not  be  listened  to  for  a  moment,  in  connection  with  any 
other  subject  but  that  of  religion.  It  would  be  condemned  in  the 
senate  and  at  the  bar,  it  would  be  drowned  in  the  tumult  of  the 
exchange  and  the  market  place.  Common  sense,  and  a  regard  to 
worldly  interests,  would  rise  up  and  hoot  down  the  traitor.  Un- 
fortunately, however,  in  the  province  of  religion,  the  natural  indis- 
position of  the  mind  to  things  unseen  and  spiritual,  allies  itself 
with  the  pleadings  of  the  sophist,  and  receives  his  doctrine  of 
in-esponsibility  with  something  like  flattering  unction.  Nothing 
more  tlian  this  is  requisite,  to  undermine  the  foundation  of 
all  religious  belief  and  morals,  to  let  open  the  floodgates  of  im- 
morality, and  to  make  the  restraints  of  religion  like  the  brittle 
flax  or  the  yielding  sand.  In  opposition  to  such  latitudinarianisra, 
we  maintain  that  man  is  responsible  for  the  dispositions  which  he 
cherishes,  for  the  opinions  v>dnch  he  holds  and  avows,  and  for  his 
habitual  conduct.  This  is  going  the  whole  length  of  Scripture, 
but  no  farther,  which  affirms  that  every  one  of  us  must  give  an 
account  of  himself  unto  God.  And  this  meets  witli  a  response 
from  amid  the  elements  of  man's  moral  nature,  which  sets  its  seal 
that  the  thing  is  true. 

*  Bailey's  Festus,  r-  40. 


OF  man"s  responsibility.  141 

1.  Our  first  remark,  tljcn,  on  this  subject,  is,  that  res2')onslhilily 
is  a  matter  of  consciousness.  A  sense  of  moral  responsibiiity 
naturally  springs  up  in  the  mind  of  man.  It  does  not  depend 
upon  processes  of  reasoning,  nor  does  it  arise  originally  out  of 
the  truths  of  revelation.  13ut  it  is  itself  a  fundamental  truth  in 
moral  science,  a  primary  principle  of  our  mental  and  moral 
constitution.  Like  the  doctrine  in  physics  of  the  existence  of  a 
material  world,  or  that  in  inetaphysics  of  the  fi'ee  agency  of  man, 
it  is  not  to  be  brought  to  the  bar  of  reason,  but  it  is  a  simple 
question  of  fact  to  be  determined  by  observation  and  experience. 
Eevelation  takes  it  for  granted,  and  reasons  and  exhorts  upon  it. 
And  we  often  find  it  healthy  and  vigorous  in  meli  whose  reason- 
ing powers  are  feeble  and  little  exercised.  Every  man  knows  and 
feels  that  he  is  a  moral  agent,  that  he  is  placed  under  a  system  of 
government  which  takes  cognizance  of  right  and  wrong,  and  that 
he  is  accountable  for  his  dispositions  and  conduct  to  his  fellows 
here,  and  to  the  Supreme  Being  hereai'ter.  We  may  be  told  that 
travellers  have  described  savage  nations  so  degraded  and  brutahzed, 
as  to  have  no  such  consciousness  as  that  of  which  we  speak.  We 
may  be  pointed  to  individuals  living  and  moving  amid  civilized 
society,  so  besotted  and  sunken  in  vice  as  apparently  never  to  be 
disturbed  with  the  idea  that  they  are  the  subjects  of  invisible 
government  and  accountable  to  "God.  Yea,  we  may  be  directed 
to  those  few  philosophers  who  stood  out  from  the  crowd  in  per- 
suading themselves,  and  in  endeavouring  to  persuade  others,  that 
the  notion  of  moral  responsibility  is  a  mere  chimera  invented  by 
priests  and  fanatics  for  friglitening  and  enslaving  men.  And  we 
may  be  asked,  how,  in  the  face  of  all  these  exceptions,  we  can 
maintain  that  the  consciousness  of  responsibility  belongs  to  all 
mankind?  Why,  suppose  that  a  man  with  a  jaundiced  eye  were 
to  liold  that  the  fleecy  clouds  which  float  over  the  face  of  the  sky, 
or  the  pure  snow  that  covers  the  sides  of  the  hills,  or  tl:ie  white 
paper  on  which  he  looks,  were  yellow.  AYhat  would  that  prove? 
Not  that  tliese  objects,  which  everybody  else  believed  to  be  white 
were  of  a  different  colour  ;  not  that  men's  eyes  were  organs  which 
in  general  conveyed  false  impressions,  but  that  the  eyes  of  the 
individual  himself  were  diseased.  We  would  never  thinJc  of  going 
among  savage  nations  which  have  become  brutalized  by  a  long 
course  of  sensuality  and  ferocity ;  we  would  never  appeal  to  this 
individual  or  that  individual,  who,  by  vicious  indulgences,  has 
sunk  himself  below  the  level  of  the  brutes;  nor  would  we  sit  at 
the  feet  of  sceptical  philosophers,  in  order  to  obtain  any  very 
strong  proofs  of  the  universality  and  force  of  those  moral  convic- 
tions which  we  assert  to  be  fundamental  principles  in  man's 
nature.  But  we  would  make  our  appeal  to  minds  Avhere  con- 
science sits  invested  with  some  authority,  and  where  she  is  listened 
to  vvith  some  degree  of  deference;  where  the  moral  sense,  so  to 


142  ixdifferentism;  or  the  denial 

speak,  is  not  droTvned  in  sensuality,  nor  bemldered  and  led  astray 
by  a  false  philosophy;  and,  in  such  minds,  we  would  find  that  the 
consciousness  of  moral  responsibility  springs  up  naturally  and 
is  strong.  We  are  not  disposed,  hoviever,  to  exclude  these  excep- 
tions, as  they  ars  called,  altogether.  We  might  appeal  to  these 
very  savage  tribes,  and  amid  their  bratal  degradation,  and  in  their 
cruel  and  superstitious  rites,  discover  the  rudimental  principles  of 
man's  moral  nature.  ^Ye  might  follow  the  man  whose  conscience 
seemed  seared,  and  whose  heart  seemed  reprobate,  whose  percep- 
tions of  right  and  wrong  were  severely  blunted,  and  who  appeared 
never  to  be  troubled  with  the  idea  of  responsibility, — we  might 
follow  him  into*  his  retirement;  and,  in  his  hours  of  calm  reflec- 
tion, we  would  see  conscience  asserting  her  supremacy  and  aveng- 
ing her  vvTongs,  the  banished  idea  of  responsibility  returning  in 
its  vividness,  and  the  dread  of  a  Supreme  and  Omniscient  Being 
forcing  itself  upon  the  soul.  We  might  appeal  to  the  sophist  him- 
self, and,  notwithstanding  all  the  refinements  of  liis  false  philoso- 
phy, we  would  see  that  at  times  he  could  no  more  divest  iiimself 
of  his  moral  nature,  than  he  could  of  his  belief  in  matter  and  a 
materieil  world,  when  he  walked  the  streets,  jostled  the  crowd,  or 
came  in  contact  with  the  pillars  that  stood  by  the  way.  Men  are 
responsible,  they  know  it  and  feel  it,  and  it  is  only  by  a  long-con- 
tinued process  of  vicious  indulgences,  or  by  the  refinement  of  an 
imreasonable  philosophy,  that  their  sense  of  accoiuitability  is 
deadened  or  subdued. 

Now  we  affirm  that  men  are  responsible  for  the  dispositions 
which  they  cherish,  and  that  this  is  a  matter  of  consciousness. 
Look  at  that  man  who  is  ever  and  anon  hurried  into  scrapes  and 
calamities  by  a  j)i'oud,  ambitious,  and  hateful  temper.  And  you 
will  see  that,  when  the  storm  of  passion  has  passed  and  reflection 
has  succeeded  to  fury,  the  individual  blames  himself,  and  suffers 
keenly  in  his  ovm  bosom.  His  ov»'n  unsophisticated  mind  never 
tells  him  that  over  his  temper  he  had  no  control,  that  it  was  as 
purely  the  result  of  physical  causes  as  the  swoln  river  tliat  chafes 
and  foams  in  its  bed,  or  as  the  ebbings  and  Sowings  of  the  sea. 
No.  The  consciousness  of  responsibility  rises  naturally  on  his 
bosom,  and,  under  its  influence,  he  bewails  liis  folly  and  condemns 
liimseh".  AVe  affirm,  too,  that  men  are  responsible  for  their 
opinions,  and  that  this  also  is  a  matter  of  consciousness.  Men's 
opinions  are  generally  very  much  influenced  by  their  dispositions, 
their  belief  on  most  subjects  is  in  a  great  measure  controlled  by 
their  inclination.  And  of  this  every  man  is  conscious.  We  feel 
that  we  cannot  believe  otherwise  than  that  two  and  two  make 
four.  And  were  an  individual,  without  jesting,  stoutly  to  main- 
tain that  two  and  two  make  five,  we  would  set  him  down  for  an 
idiot,  and  pity — not  blame  —  liim  for  the  aben-ations  of  his  un- 
derstanding.    But  we   know  that  v.-e  may,  if  we  will,  reject  or 


OF    MAN  S    RESPONSIBILITY.  1-13 

receive  this  and  the  other  moral  truth;  and  we  not  merely  pity, 
but  blame  the  man,  who,  in  spite  of  the  strongest  and  clearest 
eyidence,  refuses  to  believe.  Now,  it  may  be  asked,  how  is  this 
fact  to  be  accounted  for,  —  a  fact  in  the  natural  history  of  man — • 
that  men  feel  they  can  embrace  or  reject  this  opinion  or  that 
opinion  if  they  will,  and  that  they  commend  or  condemn  oth.ers  for 
embracing  or  rejecting  it,  except  on  the  principle  that  God  has 
made  man  a  moral  and  responsible  agent,  and  that  man  himself  is 
conscious  of  it?  "  His  creed  may  be  his  crime  ;  and  surely  none 
ought  to  see  this  more  clearly  than  the  writers  who  deny  it ;  for 
why  their  eternal  invectives  against '  doginas,' — and  especially  the 
tolerably  universal  dogma  that  men  are  responsible  for  the  forma- 
tion of  their  opinions,  —  except  upon  the  supposition  that  raen  are 
responsible  for  framing  and  maintaining  them?  If  they  are  not, 
men  should  be  left  alone ;  if  they  are,  they  are  to  be  thought  of  as 
'  worse  and  better'  for  their  '  intellectual  creeds.'  "•!-  "We  affu-m, 
too,  that  men  are  responsible  for  their  conduct  in  general,  and  that 
this  also  is  a  matter  of  consciousness.  Our  conduct  is  very  much 
the  result  of  our  dispositions  and  opinions.  So  that,  if  it  be 
admitted  that  we  are  responsible  for  the  one,  it  must  be  admitted 
that  we  are  responsible  for  the  other.  But  it  is  not  so  much  with 
the  philosophy  of  the  fact,  as  with  the  fact  itself,  that  we  have  at 
present  to  do.  There  is  the  feeling  of  remorse  bearing  witness  to 
this  truth.  "  Remorse,"  says  Isaac  Taylor*,  "  is  man's  dread 
prerogative,  and  is  the  natural  accompaniment  of  his  constitution 
as  a  knowing,  voluntary  agent,  left  in  trust  with  his  own  welfai'e 
and  that  of  others.  Hemorse,  if  we  exclude  the  notion  of  re- 
sponsibility, is  an  enigma  in  human  nature,  never  to  be  ex- 
plained." 

It  will  not  do  to  say,  as  has  been  said,  that  these  feelings  are 
altogether  factitious,  that  they  have  been  instilled  into  our  minds 
by  our  fond  mothers  who  have  spoiled  us,  or  by  the  ministers  of 
religion  who,  from  policy  or  self-interest,  would  frighten  us ;  and 
that,  but  for  such  artificial  training,  the  spendthrift,  the  sensual- 
ist, and  the  criminal,  would  never  shrink  from  the  feai'  of  a  present 
God,  and  the  anticipation  of  a  future  reckoning.  For,  besides 
remarking  with  the  author  of  the  "  Natural  History  of  Enthusi- 
asm," that,  "  nothing  can  be  more  unphilosophical  than  to  attri- 
bute any  permanent  and  miiA'ersally  diffused  modes  of  feeling 
to  the  influence  and  interested  teaching  of  some  one  class  of  the 
community," — we  ask,  how  comes  it  that  men  Vvho  never  crossed 
the  thresliold  of  the  sanctuary,  and  never  sat  at  the  feet  of  the 
teachers  of  religion,  who  have  desipsed  a  good  mother's  counsels 
and  whose  lives  have  run  contrary  to  the  jmrental  example, — how 
comes  it  that  they    in  their  calm  moments  of  reflection,  cannot 

*  The  Eclipso  oiFuitli,  p.  11-5.  +  Man  Eesponsible,  p.  25. 


lit  INDIi'FERENTlSM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

divest  themselves  of  tlie  unwelcome  idea  of  responsibility,  of  an 
invisible  Power,  and  of  a  coming  account?  It  is  a  fact,  then,  in 
the  natural  history  of  man,  not  to  be  proved  by  reasoning,  but  to 
be  decided  simply  by  observation,  that  the  consciousness  of  re- 
sponsibility attaches  to  him.  Independent  of  all  external  teaching, 
the  conviction  is  naturally  produced  in  his  mind  that  he  has,  in 
a  gi*eat  measure,  a  control  over  his  opinions  and  conduct,  and 
that  for  these  he  is  accountable  here  and  hereafter.  And  it  is  only 
when  he  has  unmanned  himself,  as  it  were,  by  vicious  indulgences, 
or  been  led  astray  by  a  corrupt  philosophy,  that  he  becomes  dead 
to  the  feeling  that  he  is  the  subject  of  moral  government  and 
responsible  to  God. 

2.  Om-  second  remark  is,  that  Responsilnlitu  rests  on  the  fact 
of  mans  free  agency.  The  ground  has  been  denied.  But  what 
has  not  ?  We  appeal  to  every  man's  conscience  and  unsophisti- 
cated sense  in  proof  of  it.  "  It  moves  for  all  that,"  said  Galileo, 
after  signing  his  memorable  recantation.  And  endeavour  to  per- 
suade men,  as  you  will,  that  they  are  driven  on  by  irresistible 
Xjhysical  causes,  they  declare  in  spite  of  all  your  reasonings,  we 
are  free  after  all.  Now,  it  is  obvious,  on  the  slightest  reflection, 
that  our  will,  and  our  will  only,  is  the  proper  object  of  command  ; 
and  that  we  are  no  otherwise  responsible,  or  susceptible  of  moral 
government,  than  as  we  are  the  subjects  of  voluntary  powers.  Man 
is  accountable  because  he  is  a  free  agent.  And  the  dispositions 
which  he  habitually  cherishes,  the  opinions  which  he  holds,  and 
the  conduct  which  he  pursues,  are,  in  a  great  measure,  under  his 
control,  and  as  he  wills  them  to  be.  The  distinction  between 
moral  and  natural  inability  is  a  sound  and  useful  one.  ]Moral 
inability  lies  in  the  want  of  disposition,  inclination,  or  will,  to  do 
that  wJiicli  a  man  has  natural  faculties  to  perform.  Natural  in- 
ability, on  the  other  hand,  arises  from  the  want  of  natural  faculties 
and  means  to  do  that  which  the  individual,  it  may  be,  would  very 
gladly  do.  This  distinction  is  before  us,  when  we  notice  that  man  is 
responsible  for  his  dispositions,  his  belief,  and  his  conduct,  in  so 
far  as  they  are  the  result  of  his  own  free  agency. 

]Man  is  responsible  for  his  dispositions,  because  the  Creator  has 
endowed  him  with  faculties  in  the  right  exercise  of  which  he  can 
bring  them  under  his  control.  We  make  all  reasonable  allovrances 
for  original  temperament,  or  peculiarities  in  the  organic  structm-e 
of  individuals.  These,  however,  are  not  altogether  beyond  the 
reach  of  moral  culture.  On  the  contrary,  it  is  a  chief  business  in 
education,  to  study  these  peculiarities,  to  bring  proper  motives  to 
bear  upon  them,  and  tlms,  in  some  measure,  gain  a  mastery  over 
the  original  temperament.  In  asserting  tliat  man  can,  to  a  con- 
sidoi-able  extent,  make  himself  master  of  his  dispositions,  and  that 
for  their  state  lie  is  responsible,  we  do  not  mean  to  say  that  he 
can,  at  any  given  moment,  by  a  direct  volition  of  his  uiind,  call 


J 


OF    man's    rvESPONSILilLlTY.  115 

forth  this  emotion  or  that  emotion,  this  kind  of  temper  or  that  kind 
of  temper.  But  what  '>\-c  mean  to  say  is,  that  he  can,  at  his  wih', 
attend  to  those  truths  or  come  in  contact  with  tljose  ohjects,  the 
natural  influence  of  which  is  to  excite  certain  emotions,  and  jior- 
duce  such  a  disposition  of  the  mind  and  heart.  Take  an  example 
in  illustration  of  this  principle.  Benevolence  toward  the  suffering 
poor  is  an  excellent  disposition  of  the  soul.  I  may  not  he  able 
by  a  direct  efibrt  of  the  mind,  to  call  up  this  emotion  at  any  time 
or  in  any  place.  But  I  can,  if  I  will,  listen  to  the  lionest  tale  of 
distress,  which  the  virtuous  poor  have  to  tell ;  I  can,  if  I  will,  visit 
the  fatherless  and  widows  in  their  afBiciions.  And  thus  by  a 
voluntary  exercise  of  my  own  power,  place  myself  in  circumstances 
that  will  excite  or  strengthen  compassion  and  bevevolence  towards 
the  wretched.  The  frequent  repetition  of  this  voluntary  process 
of  attending  to,  and  impartially  examining  scenes  of  distress, 
results  in  the  production  of  the  man  of  feeling  and  of  a  benevolent 
disposition.  Whereas,  in  the  case  of  the  man  who  meets  every 
suppliant  with  a  surly  look,  and  refuses  to  listen  to  the  tale  of  the 
stranger,  who,  like  the  Levite  in  tlie  parable,  coldly  and  uncon- 
cernedly passes  by  the  sufferer  on  the  wayside;  that  callous  and 
unfeeling  disposition  is  forming  which  is  not  only  proof  against 
compassion,  but  which  even  delights  in  producing  scenes  of  woe. 
It  is  just,  in  like  manner,  with  the  devout  emotions.  One  man 
moves  day  after  day  amid  the  glories  of  earth  and  sky,  without 
a  pious  sentiment  or  feeling  toward  Him  who  stretched  out  the 
heavens  like  a  curtain  and  clothed  the  grass  of  the  field,  because 
he  does  not  attend  to  them  as  manifestations  of  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God.  Another  individual,  of  no  gi-eater  strength  of 
intellect  it  may  be,  directs  his  attention  to  these  evidences  of  the 
cliaracter  and  presence  of  the  Divinity,  habitually  meditates  on 
thAn,  and  feels  that  — 

"  these  declaro 
God's  goodness  beyoud  thought,  and  power  divine." 

In  these  and  similar  cases,  men  are  responsible  for  tlio  moral 
state  of  the  heart,  because  they  have  the  power  of  attending  to 
those  truths  and  objects  which  are  fitted  to  produce  such  impres- 
sions on  the  soul.  V\'e  say  to  the  ferocious  man,  to  the  avaricious 
man,  to  the  sensualist,  and  the  revengeful,  and  to  the  man  all 
v/hose  mental  tendencies  are  away  from  the  absolute  good,  that 
for  these  dispositions  you  are  responsible,  because  you  voluntarily 
sought  and  familiarized  your  minds  with  those  objects  and  scenes 
that  produced  and  strengthened  them,  and  turned  away  from 
those  other  objects  and  scenes  that  would  liave  counteracted  them, 
and  produced  dispositions  of  a  different  and  nobler  kind.  It  is 
thus  that  a  man  is  brought  in  responsible  for  those  ungodly  emo- 
tions and  dispositions,  v;hich,  having  grown  with  his  growth,  and 
strengthened  with  his  strength,  liave  carried  him  captive,  and  hold 

L 


146  INDIFFERENTISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

iiim  in  fetters  wliicli  nothing  but  a  mighty  spiritual  influence  can 
rend  asunder. 

It  is  on  the  very  same  principle,  that  vre  hold  man  to  be  respon- 
sible for  his  belief.  Our  opinions,  in  so  far  as  they  are  influenced 
by  our  dispositions,  our  beliefs  in  so  far  as  they  are  controlled  by 
oiu' inclination,  are  legitimate  subjects  of  responsibility.  Inclina- 
tion has  nothing  v.-hatever  to  do  in  believing  that  two  and  two 
make  four,  or  tliat  the  three  angles  of  a  triangle  are  equal  to  two 
right  angles.  A  man  in  his  senses  could  not  believe  otherwise. 
But  inclination  has  much  to  do  in  receiving  or  rejecting  moral  and 
religious  truth.  All  enlightened  belief  depends  u])on  evidence, 
the  effect  of  the  clearest  and  strongest  evidence  depends  very  much 
on  attention,  and  attention  is  a  mental  exercise  over  which  we 
have  a  complete  control.  This  being  the  case,  it  is  very  obvious 
that  a  man  may  contract  deep  moral  guilt,  by  neglecting  to  attend 
to  evidence  in  support  of  a  subject  of  intrinsic  magnitude  and 
bearing  on  man's  highest  interests.  The  case  of  the  Jewish  people 
is  in  point.  When  Jesus  of  Nazareth  appeared  among  them,  He 
claimed  to  be  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Messiah  of  promise.  In 
support  of  these  claims.  He  openly  w^rought  miracles  of  surpassing 
grandeur  and  benevolence.  He  did  not  call  on  them  to  believe  on 
the  ground  of  his  own  bare  assertions,  but  He  j)ointed  them  to  his 
mighty  deeds  in  proof  that  He  had  come  from  God.  He  said,  if 
ye  believe  not  me,  believe  the  works.  Now,  we  do  not  assert  that 
the  Jews  were  under  a  moral  obligation  to  believe  at  the  very  first 
that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  but  we  do  assert  that  they  were 
morally  bound  to  attend  to  tliat  clear  and  strong  evidence,  to  weigh 
it  fairly,  and  to  let  it  have  its  full  influence  on  their  minds.  Those 
of  them  that  did  so,  hailed  him  as  the  deliverer  and  consolation 
of  Israel.  While  the  vast  majority  of  them,  because  his  doctrines 
fnwarted  their  fondest  wishes  and  frowned  on  their  grovelling 
expectations,  ridiculed  his  pretensions,  ascribed  liis  v/orks  to 
Batanic  agency,  and  treated  Him  as  the  vilest  of  impostors.  That 
inclination  had  much  to  do  witli  tliis,  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
the  multitudes,  at  his  first  appearing,  would,  on  the  ground  of  his 
miraculous  deeds,  have  made  Him  their  king;  and  it  was  not  till 
they  saw  his  designs  to  be  running  counter  to  their  wishes,  that 
they  rejected  Him  and  cried  out,  "  crucify  him."  It  was  in  their 
refusal  honestly  and  impartially  to  attend  to  that  evidence,  that 
the  Israelitish  nation  incurred  deep  moral  guilt  in  the  sight  of 
lieaven. 

A  messenger  from  majesty  arrives  in  the  condemned  cell  of  some 
gaol,  and  presents  the  doomed  criminal  with  a  document  containing 
a  fidl  and  free  pardon,  to  which  is  afiixed  the  royal  seal.  He  is 
sceptical  at  first  as  to  the  truth  of  the  document.  But  he  carefully 
examines  the  seal.  He  is  convinced  tliat  it  is  the  sovei-eign's,  and 
on  that  evidence  he  joyfully  and  gratefully  receives  the  pardon. 


Oi    man's    IIESPONSIBILITY.  147 

The  Bible  is  such  a  document  It  claims  to  be  divine.  It  con- 
tains important  statements  ou  subjects  of  vast  magnitude.  It 
presents  itself  to  our  notice  under  the  highest  of  all  authority.  It 
declares  that  on  its  reception  or  rejection  depend  our  greatest 
interests  in  time  and  eternity.  And,  in  support  of  all  these  claims 
and  assertions,  it  exliibits  an  amount  of  evidence  which,  for  weight 
and  clearness,  can  be  produced  by  no  other  book  in  the  world.  It 
says,  attend  to  tliat  evidence,  look  at  it  fairly  and  impartially. 
And  it  dreads  not  the  consequence.  ^Ye  do  not  say  that  a  man 
is  morally  bound  to  believe  the  volume,  on  the  naked  assertion 
that  it  is  divine.  But  we  do  say  that  he  is  responsible  for  what- 
ever opinions  he  forms  in  reference  to  it,  be  these  opinions  friendly 
or  hostile.  He  can,  by  a  voluntary  effort,  examine  the  evidence ; 
he  can  search  the  book,  he  can  look  at  the  seals,  he  can  question 
the  witnesses.  This  he  can  do,  and  must  do  honestly.  And,  in 
this  intellectual  process  over  which  he  has  a  direct  control,  in  this 
effort  of  the  attention  which  he  has  at  his  will,  lies  his  responsibility 
for  his  belief.  The  very  fact  that  the  Book,  irrespective  altogether 
of  its  truthfulness,  claims  to  have  come  from  the  throne  of  the 
Eternal,  the  very  fact  that  the  subjects  of  which  it  treats  are  of 
vast  moment,  the  very  fact  that  it  presents  such  a  brilliant  array 
of  evidence  in  proof  of  its  divinity,  —  these  place  all  men,  among 
whom  it  comes,  under  a  moral  obligation  to  attend  to  it,  and,  in 
the  face  of  the  evidence,  impartially  to  form  then-  opinions  re- 
garding it.  One  man  may  refuse  to  do  this,  because  his  mind  is 
habitually  so  Mstless  and  indifferent  as  never  to  care  about  having 
any  settled  opinions  on  such  subjects.  Another  man  may  be  so 
profligate  and  sensual  as,  like  the  beast  in  his  lair,  to  be  unwilling 
to  be  disturbed  by  the  approach  of  the  light.  While  another  man, 
from  pride  of  intellect,  or  station,  or  self-sufficiency,  may  never 
bend  his  mind  humbly  and  fairly  to  consider  whether  or  not  the 
Gospel  is  the  truth  of  God.  Hume,  the  celebrated  infidel,  tells 
us  that  his  readings  in  the  New  Testament  were  but  scanty.  Vol- 
taire and  Paine  betrayed  gross  ignorance  of  the  Christian  system 
which  they  thought  to  banish  from  the  v/orld.  But  whatever  be 
the  specific  moral  cause  that  keeps  men  from  attending  to  the 
Gospel  testimony,  or  induces  them  to  examine  it  in  a  frivolous 
and  prejudicial  manner,  it  is  in  the  attention,  over  which  they 
have  a  direct  control,  that  lies  their  responsibility  for  their  belief. 
This  point  being  established  in  reference  to  dispositions  and 
opinions,  nothing  need  be  added  to  show  that  the  principle  holds 
good  in  reference  to  actions.  Our  conduct,  as  already  said,  is 
very  much  the  result  of  our  opinions  and  dispositions.  I  cherish 
such  dispositions  and  form  such  ojjinions  in  reference  to  my 
neighbour  and  the  Supreme  Being,  and  I  act  accordingly.  If  I 
have  a  control  over  my  dispositions  and  opinions  and  am  respon- 
sible for  them,  I  have  a  control  over  and  am  responsible  for  the 

T       O 


148  INDIFFERENTISM  ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

actions  that  proceed  from  tliem.  This  is  never  questioned  in  tlie 
sphere  of  worldly  concerns.  It  is  only  when  you  venture  witliin 
the  sphere  of  religion  that  scepticism  is  thrown  over  it.  Some 
men  who  talk  and  act  rationally  enough  in  their  ordinary  inter- 
CGiu'se  with  the  world,  would  doti'  tliat  rationality  and  play  the 
fool,  when  they  touch  upon  inan's  relation  to  things  unseen  and 
eternal.  They  assail  and  condenm  men  of  a  different  political 
creed  from  their  own  for  the  opinions  which  they  advocate,  and  the 
thought  never  occurs  to  them  that  it  is  folly  so  to  do,  hecause 
over  their  belief  they  have  no  control.  But  no  sooner  does  the 
politician  become  a  moral  teacher,  than,  (as  in  a  well-known 
instance,  not,  we  trust,  to  be  repeated.)  he  announces  it  as  a  great 
truth  which  has  gone  out  through  all  tlie  earth,  that  man  has  no 
control  over  his  belief,  and  that  an  atheist  is  to  be  pitied  but  not 
blamed.  True  philosophy,  and  man's  u-nsophisticated  nature, 
common  sense,  and  revealed  religion,  tell  us  tliat  we  have  such  a 
control,  and  that  for  our  sentiments  and  conduct  we  are  respon- 
sible to  God. 

3rd.  Our  third  remark  is,  that  responslhillty  is  to  he  measured  hij 
abilitij  and  privilege.  Eesponsibility  springs,  as  we  have  seen, 
from  the  structure  of  the  human  mind  as  endowed  with  faculties, 
in  the  exercise  of  which  man  can  direct  his  thoughts  to  a  given 
subject,  compare  all  the  facts  and  considerations  bearing  upon  it, 
and  ttius  ai'rive  at  an  honest  and  impartial  decision  regarding  it. 
But  the  measure  of  responsibility,  in  the  case  of  particular  com- 
munities or  individuals,  is  to  be  estimated  by  such  things  as  the 
tbllowing ;  —  the  capacity  of  their  understanding,  the  means  and 
opportunities  of  information,  and  the  force  of  evidence.  The 
poor  harmless  idiot  who  fancies  himself  a  king,  and  declares  the 
reigning  monarch  a  usurper ;  who  talks  day  after  day  of  raising 
armies,  and  marcliing  on  to  London  to  take  possession  of  the 
crown ;  is  never  accounted  a  traitor,  tried  and  condemned  as  such. 
The  man  whose  intellect  is  naturally  so  imbecile  as  scarcely  to 
comprehend  the  ideas  of  a  God,  of  his  own  moral  relations,  and  of 
a  future  life,  occupies  a  vastly  lower  positio-n  in  point  of  respon- 
sibility, (if  he  occupies  any  position  on  that  ground  at  all,)  than 
the  man  whose  intellect  is  naturally  sound  and  vigorous,  but 
who,  in  reference  to  moral  and  religious  truth,  is  a  child  in  under- 
standing. 

It  is,  in  like  manner,  with  the  means  and  opportunities  of  in- 
formation. No  one  woidd  ever  say  that  the  Bechuana  of  the 
desert,  who  had  lived  like  his  forefathers,  remote  from  civilization, 
v/ho  had  never  seen  the  face  of  a  missionaiy,  nor  heai'd  a  word 
aliout  the  Saviour  of  mankind,  is  resjionsible  in  the  same  degree 
as  a  Briton  living  in  this  land  of  light  and  liberty  where  know- 
ledge runs  to  and  fro  and  is  increased. 

liesponsibility  takes  its  measure,  not  only  from  the  capacity  of 


or-    man's    riESPONSIBILlTY.  ll'J 

the  understanding,  and  the  means  and  opportunities  of  information, 
but  also  from  the  force  of  evidence.  This  is  strildngly  ilhistrated 
by  Paul  in  the  lirst  two  chapters  of  his  epistle  to  the  liomans,  and 
the  inspired  illustration  accords  with  uninspired  testimonies  and 
man's  moral  sentiments.  Look  abroad,  then,  upon  the  ancient 
heathen  world,  upon  the  seats  of  intellectual  refinement,  Egypt, 
Greece,  and  Eome.  And  what  do  we  witness?  Men  professing 
themseh^es  to  be  wise, — claiming  to  be  philosophers, — worshipping 
images  in  the  shape  of  men,  and  birds,  and  beasts,  and  creeping 
things ;  debasing  and  dislionouring  God.,  and  debasing  and  dis- 
iionouring  themselves.  But  some  will  say,  they  were  not  respou/ 
sible  for  this;  over  their  dispositions,  their  opinions,  and  their 
conduct  in  this  matter,  they  had  no  control.  They  were  to  bo 
pitied,  not  blamed;  no  more  to  be  blamed  than  for  the  colour  of 
then-  skin  or  the  height  of  their  stature.  Yes,  says  Paul,  they 
were  to  be  blamed,  tliey  were  responsible  in  this  matter,  they 
wei-e  guilty  in  cherishing  tliese  vile  affections,  in  holding  these 
erroneous  opinions,  and  in  manifesting  such  clegTading  conduct. 
They  had  evidence  which,  if  they  had  duly  attended  to  it,  woidd 
have  led  them  to  feel,  to  think,  and  to  act  differently.  There  was 
a  sufficiency  of  evidence  in  the  works  of  creation,  in  the  shining 
Jieavens  above  them,  and  in  the  fruitful  earth  around  them,  to 
have  convinced  them  that  one  Almighty,  and  all-perfect  Beiog 
had  made  and  presides  over  the  whole.  It  is  not  the  want  of 
evidence,  but  the  want  of  relish  for  the  truth  about  the  Creator, 
that  accounts  for  their  idolatrous  opinions  and  practices.  "I'jr 
the  invisible  things  of  liim  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are 
clearly  seen,  being  understood  by  the  things  that  are  made,  even 
his  eternal  power  and  godhead;  so  that  they  are  without  excuse  "* 
Tlie  heathen,  then,  were  responsible;  and  that  responsibility 
took  its  measure  from  the  means  of  information,  and  the  force  of 
evidence,  whicli  they  possessed.  But  the  measure  of  oin*  respon- 
sibility is  vastly  greater  than  theirs.  We  walk  amid  a  clearer 
light  than  what  is  emitted  from  these  resplendent  heavens,  we  hear 
louder,  fuller  and  more  impressive  voices  than  any  which  proceed 
from  the  hills  and  the  valleys,  the  woods  and  the  waters.  The 
revelation  which  hf?s  come  to  us  direct  from  the  throne  of  the 
Eternal,  containing,  as  it  does,  ample  information  on  subjects 
of  supreme  importance, — information  which  none  of  the  wisest  of 
the  heathen  could  have  evoked  from  the  material  heavens  and 
earth, —  this  places  us  on  a  ground  of  responsibility  higher  far 
than  that  occupied  by  tlie  most  gifted  sage  of  the  Grecian  schools, 
who  had  no  other  light  but  tlie  glimmering  light  of  nature.  This 
is  what  the  apostle  means  when  he  says,  "as  many  as  have  sinned 
without  law,  (that  is,  without  a  special  revelation  of  the  divine 

*  IJomaD?  i.  20. 


150  iNDirfEr.EXTis:.!;  on,  the  denial 

%yill,)  sliall  also  be  condemned  Avitliout  law  (or  hj  a  diffi'rcnt 
standard) :  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the  law  sliall  be  judged 
by  the  law."-!'  All  who,  without  a  diriue  revelation,  have  erred 
from  the  truth  and  done  wrong,  will  be  condemned  by  the  evi- 
dence afforded  by  tlie  light  of  nature ;  and  all  who  have  sinned 
under  the  revelation  of  God's  will  shall  be  judged  by  that  revela- 
tion. Eeason  and  Scripture  thus  unite  their  testimonies,  in  estab- 
lishing the  position  that  responsibility  is  in  proportion  to  the 
means  of  information  and  the  weight  and  clearness  of  evidence. 

An  indi\'idual  may  be  very  unwilling  to  avail  liimself  of  these 
means,  and  to  look  calmly  and  impartially  at  that  evidence ;  but 
tliis  indifference  only  adds  to  his  guilt,  and  does  not,  in  the  least, 
lessen  the  measure  of  his  responsibility.  Hesponsibility  takes  its 
measure  not  from  an  individual's  inclination,  but  from  an  in- 
dividual's capacity  of  understanding,  his  opportunity  of  arriving 
at  the  truth,  and  tlie  sufficiency  of  evidence  which  he  enjoys. 
Were  an  individual  to  hold  that  responsibility  takes  its  measure 
from  the  inclination,  or  what  is  called  moral  ability,  he  Avould  be 
landed  in  the  very  strange  position  that  a  man  is  under  an  obliga- 
tion only  to  do  that  which  he  is  inclined  to  do.  In  other  words, 
ho  would  tear  up  responsibility,  root  and  fibre,  and  cast  it  to  the 
winds.  Suppose  that,  in  reference  to  some  disturbed  district,  a 
royal  proclamation  were  issued  forbidding  the  inhabitants,  under 
severe  penalties,  to  go  abroad  after  sunset.  The  proclamation  is 
read  aloud  at  the  market-cross,  it  is  posted  up  on  the  church 
doors  and  all  other  places  of  public  resort.  None  who  wished  to 
become  acquainted  with  the  purport  of  the  royal  decree,  could 
remain  ignorant  of  it.  But  some  individuals  who  gave  no  heed 
to  royal  proclamations,  and  would  not  trouble  themselves  to 
ascertain  the  meaning  of  this  particular  one,  venture  abroad  in 
the  time  prohibited,  are  captured,  charged  with  breaking  the  law, 
and  put  upon  their  trial.  Would  any  judge,  knowing  the  capacity 
of  the  men,  and  the  means  of  knowledge  within  their  reach,  listen 
for  a  moment  to  the  plea,  we  never  heard  the  proclamation,  and 
were  utterly  ignorant  of  the  law  in  this  matter.  No.  The  judge 
would  say,  you  are  persons  who  can  read  and  understand ;  this 
proclamation  was  published  in  your  streets,  and  placarded  in  the 
most  frequented  places;  you  were  indisposed  to  become  acquainted 
with  it,  you  are  responsible  for  the  consequences,  and  must  endure 
the  stated  penalty.  Now,  it  is  on  this  principle,  we  liold,  that 
men,  having  available  means  of  coming  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,  and  yet  indisposed  to  avail  themselves  of  them,  having  the 
Bible  within  their  reach  and  yet  refusing  to  read  it,  Jiaving  the 
Gospel  at  the  very  threshold  of  th.eir  doors  and  jet  unwilling  to 
come  out  and  liearit;  it  is  on  this  principle  we  maintain,  that 

*  Koinans  ii.  12, 


OF   mane's   IlliSPONSIBILITY  151 

tlieir  responsibility  is  little  less  tlifin  if  tliey  knew  that  Bible,  and 
•.understood  the  truths  of  that  Gospel.  A  man  may  say,  I  did  not 
know  that  the  Book  prohibited  such  a  course  of  conduct,  and 
threatened  such  penalties  against  those  who  pursued  it.  I  did 
not  know  that  it  prescribed  such  a  path  to  be  followed,  and  pro- 
mised such  blessings  to  those  who  entered  upon  and  prosecuted 
it.  There  would  be  force  in  such  a  plea  coming  from  an  in- 
dividual so  situated  as  that  it  was  physically  impossible  for  him 
to  have  access  to  the  divine  record,  to  read  and  understand  it. 
But  the  answer  to  an  individual  having  access  to  ample  means, 
and  urging  such  a  plea,  would  be  :  you  had  the  volume  near  you 
and  could  have  read  it,  you  had  the  Gospel  within  hearing  and 
could  have  listened  to  it,  you  were  indisposed  to  come  to  the  know- 
ledge of  the  truth,  sin  lies  at  your  own  door,  your  responsibility 
is  to  be  measured  not  by  your  inclination  but  by  your  privileges. 
"  Unto  whomsoever  much  is  given,  of  the  same  much  shall  be 
required." 

4tli.  Our  fourth  remark  is,  that  responsibility  remains  indestructible 
amid  all  object  ions  from  original  temperament  and  external  injhienccs. 
It  is  not  necessary  that  we  here  pronounce  any  judgment  on  the 
claims  of  phrenology  to  be  regarded  as  a  system  of  intellectual 
philosophy.  We  woidd  only  say,  that  as  long  as  any  of  the  results 
of  comparative  anatomy  disagree  with  it,  and  physiologists  of  the 
first  rank  can  urge  some  strong  objections  against  it,  so  long  must 
we  regard  it  as  far  from  being  a  fixed  and  settled  science.  But 
assuming  that  the  physiological  facts  upon  which  it  is  grounded 
are  correct,  that  the  feelings  or  faculties  of  the  mind  are  in  propor- 
tion to  and  determined  by  the  protuberances  in  the  cranium,, 
human  liberty  and  accountability  are  not,  as  some  have  alleged, . 
affected  thereby.  Mr.  George  Combe,  who  advances  such  high, 
claims  for  the  science,  obviously  thought  it  consistent  with  respon- 
sibility, when  he  says,  "  to  the  animal  nature  of  man  have  been 
added,  by  a  bountiful  Creator,  moral  sentiments  and  reflecting 
faculties,  which  not  only  place  him  above  all  other  creatm-es  on 
earth,  but  constitute  him  a  different  being  from  any  of  them,  a 
rational  and  accountable  being."=:-  But  some  men,  with  the 
phrenological  map  of  the  human  skull  before  them,  and  knowing 
it  to  be  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  science  that  mental  dis- 
positions are  determined  by  the  form,  size,  and  constitution  of  the 
brain,  lenp  at  once  to  the  conclusion  that  an  individual's  character 
is  made  for  him  not  by  him,  and  that  for  it  he  is  not  responsible. 
It  were  vain  to  deny  an  original  difference  of  temperament  auvl 
organization  in  different  individuals,  or  to  underrate  the  difficidties 
arising  thence  in  reference  to  man's  moral  agency,  but  the  admis- 
sion of  these  can  be  made  while  firmly  holding  the  doctrine  of 

*  Constitution  of  Man,  p.  2.    fPeopIc's  Edition.) 


152  indifferentis.m;  or,  the  denial 

responsibility.  That  is  a  matter  of  consciousness,  a  fact  in  tlie 
natural  history  of  man,  of  which  it  were  needless  to  seek  any 
lintlier  explanation,  and  it  consequently  must  harmonize  with 
all  the  other  iacts  and  principles  of  the  human  constitution.  But 
this  is  not  all.  Some  men  have  originally,  it  is  admitted,  i^owerful 
tendencies  to  certain  vicious  dispositions  and  practices.  Such 
j^ropensities  may  be  said  to  ally  them  to  the  brutal  tribes;  and, 
were  tliey  not  jDossessed  of  a  higher  order  of  faculties,  they  would 
.stand  on  the  same  level  of  irresponsibility.  But  man  is  dis- 
tinguished from  the  lower  animals,  hj  the  possession  of  faculties, 
and  a  susceptibility  of  motives,  of  which  they  are  destitute  and 
incapable.  These  raise  the  worstof  men  above  thelevel  of  the.brutes, 
place  them  within  the  sphere  of  moral  agency,  and  give  them  a 
pov.-er  of  counteracting  or  controlling  an  original  bad  temperament. 
We  take  an  extreme  case  for  illustration.  It  Avas  said,  by  Spurz- 
heim,  of  Alexander  the  Sixth,  the  most  infamous  man  that  ever 
sat  on  tlje  papal  cliair,  that  his  "  brain  was  no  more  adequate  to 
the  manifestation  of  Christian  virtues,  tliaii  the  brain  of  an  idiot 
from  birth  to  the  exhibition  of  the  intellect  of  a  Leibnitz  or  a 
Bacon."*  Here  were  great  difficulties  arising  from  original 
temperament  and  organization ;  but  these  ditSculties  were  not  of 
the  same  kind,  nor  insuperable  in  the  same  manner,  as  the  diffi- 
culties tliat  beset  the  mind  of  the  idiot.  Alexander  Avas  endoAved 
witli  inental  faculties,  and  a  susceptibility  of  moral  motives,  Avhich 
s^ave  him  a  power  countei-active  of  the  evil  propensities,  and  ren- 
lered  him,  in  some  measure,  the  trustee  of  his  oAvn  well-being,  and 
responsible  for  his  moral  character.  It  may  have  been  a  vastly 
more  difficult  thing  for  such  a  man  to  manifest  Christian  virtues, 
than  it  was  for  Philip  Melancthon  ;  but  conscience  must  have 
])een  torn  Avholly  out  of  his  breast,  and  he  must  originally  have 
been  utterly  incapable  of  moral  sentiment,  before  he  could  hn.\Q 
been  divested  of  the  character  of  a  moral  and  responsible  agent. 
The  po]itifi",  though  carried  along  in  a  vicious  course  by  powerful 
depraA^ed  tendencies,  Avas  doubtless  conscious  of  his  moral  freedom; 
and,  unless  given  up  to  a  reprobate  mind,  must  at  times  have  had 
a  sense  of  his  responsibility.  It  is  as  natural  for  such  men,  amid 
all  theii"  dejoravity,  to  have  a  sense  of  desert  before  the  process  of 
searing  the  conscience  has  been  completed,  and  for  others  to  hold 
them  responsible  for  their  dispositions  and  conduct,  as  it  is  for 
tlie  idiot  to  be  undisturbed  by  such  a  feeling,  and  to  be  accounted 
guiltless  of  the  evil  that  may  arise  out  of  his  actions. 

The  remarks  made  in  reference  to  organization  arc  substantially 
applicable  to  external  influences.  Both  may  inodify  human  re- 
sponsibility, but  neither  of  them  destroys  it.  The  temperament 
and  situation  of  one  man  may  be  much  more  favourable  for  mani- 

*  Combe's  Coastitution  of  Mau,  p  V?. 


OF    MAN  S    ^iESPO^'STBILn■V.  153 

festing  yvhatsoeyer  tilings  are  lovely  and  true  than  the  tem]icra-  - 
meut  and  situation  of  another,  but  responsibility  is  an  attribute 
of  the  character  and  circuni stances  of  both.  If  there  is  power  on 
the  side  of  individual  organization  and  outward  influences,  so 
that  some  men  are  less  favourably  situated  in  a  moral  point  of 
view  than  others,  there  is  power  also  in  those  energies  supplied 
by  the  moral  world  which  are  counteractive  of  evil  and  productive 
of  good,  and  which  men  are  imder  an  obligation  to  study  and 
employ.  They  may  refuse  to  acquaint  themselves  with  these  moral 
forces,'  or  to  avail  themselves  of  them,  and  thus  be  carried  away 
without  a  struggle  on  the  current  of  depraved  pro])ensity  or  exter- 
nal vicious  influences ;  but  in  that  refusal  lies  their  guilt,  as  in 
the  availableness  of  the  moral  power  lies  their  responsibility.  It 
is  an  easy  thing  to  muster  up  arguments  against  human  liberty. 
Let  the  doctiine  of  the  Divine  prescience  and  foreordination  of 
all  things  be  asserted,  and  some  men  at  once  conclude  that  no 
room  il  left  for  man's  moral  freedom.  The  doctrine  does  not 
paralyze  their  energies  in  the  workshop  or  in  the  held,  and  they 
never  dream  that  it  renders  them  irresponsible  for  tlie  operations 
of  their  hands.  And  yet  the  objection  is  as  tenable  in  the  one 
case  as  in  the  other.  In  like  manner,  let  the  force  of  original  tem- 
perament and  external  circumstances  be  admitted,  and  man,  by 
some,  is  represented  as  helpless  and  destitute  of  moral  freedom, 
as  a  raft  carried  u-resistibly  down  the  river  on  which  it  floats.  It 
is  not  so  easy,  however,  to  destroy  the  argument  grounded  on  the 
facts  that  man  is  possessed  of  faculties  and  susceptible  of  motives 
that  give  him,  in  some  measure,  a  control  over  original  tempera- 
ment and  external  circumstances.  Far  less  easy  is  it  to  destroy 
that  consciousness  of  moral  freedom  which  every  man  possesses, 
vrhatever  be  his  mental  conformation,  and  the  influences  that  are 
brought  to  bear  upon  him.  If,  then,  the  sense  of  responsibility 
cannot  be  destroyed,  witliout  falsifying  the  testimony  of  all  our 
primitive  beliefs,  it  may  be  said  to  remain  truly  indestructible. 

5th.  Our  fifth  remark  is,  that  men  individualhj,  and  societies  in 
fieneral,  advance  morally  in  proiwrtion  as  the  sense  of  responsibility 
is  Jii'jh.  No  one  doubts  the  absolute  necessity  of  a  belief  in  this 
doctrine,  in  the  daily  business  of  life.  The  dealings  of  the  sb.op 
and  the  exchange  could  iiot  be  carried  on  without  it.  We  would 
not  intrust  a  servant  with  a  letter,  or  admit  a  professed  friend 
into  the  confidence  and  hospitalities  of  the  domestic  circle,  if  they 
avowed  themselves  to  be  irresponsible  and  acted  on  the  avowal. 
I'rom  the  first  minister  of  an  empire  who  kisses  the  hand  of 
majesty  on  receiving  office,  down  to  the  private  soldier  who  takes 
the  oath  of  allegiance  on  entering  the  ranks,  the  necessity  and 
reality  of  responsibility  are  acknowledged.  And  not  only  so,  but 
it  is  just  in  proportion  as  the  notion  of  responsibility  in  individuals, 
or  in  societies,  assumes  a  decidedly  religious  a'specL,thatiti3  power- 


loi  INDIFFERENTISINI ;    OR,    THE    DENIAL 

ful  for  good.  France,  a  country  v.-here  experiments  on  human 
nature,  on  a  large  scale,  have  often  been  made,  gave  at  the  close 
of  the  last  century  a  fearful  illustration  of  what  the  social  system 
becomes  when  it  loses  its  hold  of  moral  obligation.  The  philoso- 
phers and  wits  of  the  Yoltaire  school  jestingly  cried  out  "  what  is 
truth,"  declared  the  moral  system  to  have  been  superseded,  ridi- 
culed the  notion  of  responsibility  as  an  antiquated  fiction,  taught 
that  the  only  causes  in  the  world  are  physical  and  irresistilDle,  and 
that  men  are  the  offspring  of  an  invincible  necessity.  It  was  this 
doctrine  of  irresponsibility,  propounded  by  the  encyclopaedists, 
countenanced  by  statesmen,  and  propagated  throughout  the  masses, 
that  was  expressed  in  the  torrents  of  blood  that  liowed  during  the 
reign  of  terror.  Men  being  looked  upon  as  creatures  of  physical 
necessity,  were  no  more  accounted  of  than  stumps  of  trees  or 
ruined  houses,  when  they  stood  in  the  way  of  the  revolutionaiy 
movement.  They  were  levelled  to  the  ground  and  torn  up  by  the 
roots.  The  principle,  laid  down  by  Diderot,  was  acted  upon, — a 
principle  that  rose  out  of  the  ruins  of  man's  moral  agency,  —  that 
those  who  encumbered  the  social  system  should  summarily  be  de- 
stroyed. And  what  more  is  necessary  to  let  loose  the  reins  upon 
fury,  corruption,  and  massacre,  than  to  instil  into  men's  minds  the 
notion  that  they  are  the  creatures  of  fate,  and  no  more  responsible 
for  their  belief  than  for  the  colour  of  their  skin  and  the  height  of 
their  stature ! 

It  is  very  much  with  the  doctrine  of  man's  responsibility  as  it  is 
vatli  saobath  observance.  Public  men  in  our  country  generallv 
acknowledge  the  moral  and  physical  advantages  of  the  weekly  day 
of  rest,  just  as  they  recognise  the  utility  and  necessity  of  a  sense 
of  accountability  being  difiused  throughout  the  state.  But,  as  by 
far  the  most  valuable  benefits  of  the  sabbath  result  only  from  its 
religious  observance  as  a  day  sacred  to  the  memory  of  tlie  resur- 
rection of  Christ;  so  the  real  and  high  advantages  of  responsibility 
are  only  experienced  when  the  doctrine  is  felt  to  link  earth  with 
heaven,  man  with  his  Maker,  and  the  judgment  of  conscience 
with  the  judgment  of  the  gi-eat  white  throne.  "  This  practical 
doctrine  of  responsibility,"  says  Isaac  Taylor,'i<  "  can  rest  on  no 
fulcrum  short  of  the  centre  of  the  universe  —  the  throne  of  God. 
Rest  it  at  any  intermediate  point,  and  though  it  may  bear  some 
stress,  it  will  not  bear  every  stress  ;  and  it  fails  where  most  it  wiU 
be  needed."  Take  an  individual  or  a  community,  in  which  the 
sense  of  responsibility  is  weakened,  or  associated  merely  with 
worldly  calculations  ;  and  take  another  individual,  or  community, 
in  which  it  is  religious  and  vivid ;  and  it  will  be  found  that  while 
the  one  is  unstable  as  v/ater,  the  other  is  stedfast  as  a  rock ;  that 
while  the  one  is  ever  in  danger  of  sacrificing  principle  to  selfish 

*  Man  Rospousiblc,  p.  03. 


OF   MA>;  3    BESPONSIBiLlTY.  i-j-J 

cjain,  the  other  counts  nothing  dear  that  comes  into  competition 
With  principle  itself.  It  is  the  man  deeply  imbaed  \\-ith  the  re- 
ligious sense  of  responsibility  that  stands  firm  amid  all  tempta- 
tions, while  another  is  driven  with  the  wind  and  tossed  ;  and  it  is 
in  the  former  that  even  men,  who  have  no  vivid  sense  of  religion 
themselves,  prefer  reposing  confidence. 

It  will  also  be  found  that  in  societies  professedly  religious,  where 
the  dry  skeleton  of  a  creed  remains, — but  where  nen  nominally 
adhering  and  others  avowedly  opposing  are  gathered  under  one 
ecclesiastical  organization  around  it,  —  tlie  doctrine  of  respon- 
sibility, in  its  high  import,  is  either  denied  or  fluctuating  and 
feeble!  Wherever  religious  belief  comes  to  be  regarded  as  an 
accident  of  the  mind  just  as  colour  is  of  the  hair  of  the  head,  or 
wherever  responsibility,  though  admitted,  is  languid, — doctrinal 
ai'ticles  are  counted  as  of  little  worth,  the  standards  are  either 
deserted,  or  friends  and  foes  proclaim  a  truce,  and  shake  hands 
around  them ;  and  the  distinction  between  the  church  and  the 
world,  —  a  distinction  so  much  insisted  on  in  the  Kew  Testament, 
■ — disappears  and  is  lost. 

Indi-sT-duals  of  the  brightest  moral  excellence  have  been  these 
who  were  influenced  by  a  high  and  religious  sense  of  responsibility. 
Men,  to  whose  instrumentality  the  v/orld  ov,-es  its  reformations, 
and  the  church  its  life  and  purity,  v.'ould  never  have  struggled  as 
they  did,  and  could  never  have  eflected  the  regenerations  whicli 
they  have  eff'ected,  had  they  not  had  firm  faith  in  the  truth  that  we 
are  responsible  to  our  fellows  here  and  to  God  hereafter.  And 
those  communities  in  which  the  truth  shines  conspicuous  as  a  star. 
and  who  have  faithfully  guarded  the  church  from  the  abomination 
of  desolation,  have  been  mightily  influenced  by  the  idea  of  their 
stewardship  and  the  prospect  of  rendering  an  account.  Is  then  a 
doctrine  so  influential  for  good  both  on  individuals  and  societies, 
on  churches  and  states;  a  doctrine  that  has  been  the  guardian  of 
so  much  that  is  true  and  holy,  and  the  spring  of  so  many  grand 
and  benignant  enterprises ;  a  doctrine  that  is  beneficent  in 
proportion  as  it  is  believed  and  acted  upon, — is  it  to  be  regarded 
as  a  beautiful  and  useful  fiction,  necessary  for  the  well-being  of 
society,  but  having  no  foundation  in  truth?  This  were  something 
like  yielding  to  the  tempter,  and  falling  down  and  worshipping  Mm 
But  it  cannot  be.  It  is  written  upon  the  heart — and  nothing  but 
along  process  of  vicious  indulgence  can  cover  or  efi'ace  it;  it 
is  ^^^itten  upon  the  social  system  under  which  men  live  safely  and 
happily ;  and  it  is  written  more  legibly  and  impressively  in  the 
inspired  page, — that  every  one  of  us  must  give  an  account  of 
himself  unto  God.  Happy  the  individual,  or  the  community,  who 
moves  under  a  felt  sense  that  the  Great  Searcher  of  hearts  is  in  the 
heavens  and  looks  down  upon  men,  and  that  He  will  hereafter 
judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  and  render  to  all  according  to 
their  works. 


i-jvj  ror.MALisM ;  or,  the  len;al 

CITAPTEE  VI. 

THE  de>::al  of  the  powes  of  godliness;   or,  fokmalism. 

Not  infidelity  in  theory  but  in  practice — Nature  of  formalism — Prevalency  of 
it — Philosopliy  of  formalism  —  Heligions  of  ancient  bs-alhen  world  generally  of 
this  description — Many  of  our  meu  of  taste  and  science  chargeable  Avith  it  — 
11  em aik  of  Foster — Strong  tendency  to  formalism  in  the  ancient  Hebrews^ 
Pharisees  of  the  Christian  age  —  Formalism  in  the  Christian  Church — Result 
of  Romish  theoi-y  of  fellowship  —  The  Oxford  Eitual — Itemarlcs  of  Morell, 
D'Aubigne,  and  Taylor — Foimalism  not  peculiar  to  Pomanism  or  Tractarianism 
—  General  remarks  on  it :  — Its  utter  worthlessness  to  satisfy  the  great  wants  of 
human  nature  —  The  pleasure  found  in  spiritual  religion  not  experienced — 
Its  tendency  to  intolerance — Diametrically  opposed  to  the  spirit  and  precepts 
of  the  Gospel. 

HEPtE  Ave  advance  from  the  region  of  speculative  into  that  of 
practical  infidelity.  All  the  body  of  truth  previously  noticed, 
v.-hich  some  men  liave  denied  wholly  or  in  part,  is  supposed  to  be 
admitted ;  but  the  grand  influence  of  that  truth  on  the  conscience 
and  conduct  is  virtually  disowned.  The  prim.al  truth  that  God 
is,  the  self-existent,  independent,  and  all-perfect  One, — is  un- 
hesitatingly assented  to  ;  but  the  practical  testimony  to  that  trutli, 
Vv-hich  is  given  in  enduring  as  seeing  Him  who  is  itivisible,  is 
vfithheld.  The  proofs  of  the  being  and  character  of  God,  drav^n 
from  tlie  phenomena  of  mind  and  matter,  convince  the  under- 
standing; but,  amid  all  the  light  that  beams  from  these  phe- 
nomena, the  heart  is  alienated  and  darkened.  That  God  is  really 
a  Person — not  a  merely  infinite  substance — a  Person  related  to  us 
as  Patlier  and  Lord,  Saviour  and  Judge,  is  not  questioned;  but 
there  is  no  devout  recognition  of  Him  as  being,  in  these  relations, 
the  glorious  and  gracious  One  witli  whom  we  have  to  do.  Tlie 
no  less  well-attested  trutli  that  God  is  ever-present  with,  and 
exercises  a  m.inute  inspection  and  control  over,  his  creatures,  has 
a  placp  v/illingiy  assigned  to  it  among  the  things  believed ;  but 
there  is  an  utter  absence  of  the  manifested  power  of  that  truth,  in 
fas  Scripture  significantly  expresses  it)  walking  with  God.  The 
Bible  doctrines  of  redemption,  including  and  presupposing,  as 
they  do,  the  guilt  and  depravity  of  man,  the  atonem.ent  of  Christ, 
and  the  regenerating  influences  of  tlie  Spirit,  are  essential  parts  of 
tlie  creed;  but  that  creed  is  like  the  dry  lifeless  skeleton,  the  body 
witliout  the  spiiit.  The  man  never  tliinks  of  questioning  the  dark 
doctrine  of  sin,  but  1)6  is  not  penitent  and  humble  under  tlie  con- 
viction of  ])is  own  sinful  character.  He  musters  up  no  argument 
against  the  work  that  expiates  and  the  influences  that  sanctify,  he 
no  more  doubts  that  they  are  truths  in  the  Bible  than  lie  doubts 
that  the  sun  is-in  the  heavens;  but  he  is  not  found  standing  on 
that  work,  ov  Hying  under  the  power  of  those  influences,  any  more 
than  if  their  existence  and  efficacy  were  restricted  to  some  distant 


OF    THE    rOV/ER    OF    GODLINESS.  157 

•woiid.  He  T'.^oiild  no  more  think  of  denying  tliat  man  is  respon- 
sible for  his  dispositions,  ojoinions,  and  conduct,  than  of  denying 
that  he  tliinks,  feels,  and  acts.  Words  implying  moral  agency 
and  accountability  are  ever  flowing  over  his  lips,  and  yet  his 
habitual  sentiments  and  conduct  are  such  as  could  only  be  fonned 
under  an  habitual  forgetfulness  of  Him  whose  eyes  behold  and 
Avhose  eyelids  try  the  children  of  men.  There  is  no  infidelity  in 
theory,  but  there  is  abundance  of  it  in  practice.  In  so  far  as  the 
mere  letter  of  a  creed  is  concerned,  all  may  be  evangelical  and 
coiTect ;  but  the  inner  and  outer  man  are  as  little  influenced  by 
it  as  by  the  abrogated  notions  of  the  Ptolemaic  system.  There  is 
religion,  but  it  is  merely  professional  and  verbal.  "  The  sign  is 
taken  for  the  thing,  the  counter  for  the  money."  The  structure 
is  complete  as  regards  shape,  size,  and  bones ;  but  the  flesh  and 
blood,  the  sparkling  eye,  and  the  agile  limbs,  are  wanting.  This 
is  wliat  the  Scripture  means  wdien  it  speaks  of  men  having  the 
form  of  godliness,  but  denying  the  power  thereof. 

Formalism  is  tlie  tendency  of  the  mind  to  rest  in  the  mere 
externals  of  religion,  to  the  neglect  of  the  inner  life  of  religion 
itself.  It  is  just  as  when  a  child  runs  his  lesson  rapidly  over 
without  heeding  the  import  of  the  story  v/hicli  lie  reads.  It  is 
just  as  if  our  knowledge  of  a  man  was  confined  to  liis  stature,  to 
the  shape  and  colour  of  his  coat ;  so  that,  when  his  name  is  men- 
tioned in  our  presence,  we  immediately  think  of  his  size  and  dress 
but  nothing  more.  It  is  the  folly  of  valuing  the  tree  for  its  bark, 
instead  of  its  goodly  timber ;  the  folly  of  choosing  a  book  for  its 
binding,  irrespective  of  the  nature  of  its  contents;  tbe  folly  of 
delighting  in  painted  windows  and  adorned  wa,lls,  regardless  of 
the  character  of  the  society  and  accommodation  wdthin.  It  is  tho 
very  essence  of  formalism  to  set  the  outward  institutions  above 
the  inward  truths,  to  be  jounctilious  in  going  the  roiuid  of  cere- 
monial observances  while  neglectful  of  those  spiritual  sacrifices 
Avith  which  God  is  w^ell  pleased,  to  substitute  means  in  the  room 
of  ends,  and  to  rest  in  the  type  and  symbol  without  rising  to  the 
glorious  reality.  It  will  stand  up  for  the  skeleton  creed,  though 
the  life  be  as  little  influenced  by  it  as  by  a  muuimy ;  it  wdll  in 
the  strength  of  its  zeal,  put  on  armour,  brandish  weapons,  guard 
the  courts  of  thesanctuary  from  unhallowed  intrusion,  and  shout 
lustily,  "  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of  the  Lord  are  we;" 
while  it  lacks  heart  for  fighting  the  good  fight  of  faith,  and  wrest- 
ling vdth  spiritual  wickednesses.  The  church  and  the  sacraments, 
the  symbol  and  the  lettered  creed,  fill  the  sphere  of  its  vision,  and 
draw  forth  its  devotion,  to  tho  almost  utter  exclusion  of  those 
grand  s]nritual  objects  that  are  unseen  and  eternal.  Such,  in 
general,  is  the  character  of  formalism. 

It  is  not  a  thing  peculiar  to  any  age  or  country,  though  it  may 
bs  more  prevalent  at  one  time  and  in  one  place  than  in  another. 


iaS  roEiiALisM ;  on,  the  dental 

Yflierever  there  is  a  field,  we  meet  witli  weeds  or  thorns;  and 
wherever  humanity  dwells,  we  witness,  to  some  extent  or  auoiher, 
formalism.  We  may  travel  over  a  large  tract  of  inhabited  country, 
and  find  there  no  such  monster  as  absolute  atheism ;  we  may  meet 
with  large  masses  of  men  among  whom  pantheism,  or  naturalism, 
has  scarcely  a  local  habitation ;  we  may  enter  into  one  crowded 
congregation  after  another,  and  hear  the  doctrines  of  Socinianism, 
of  a  false  spiritualism,  and  of  irresponsibility,  repudiated;  but 
formalism  is  a  tiling  at  hand  as  well  as  afar  ofl',  it  lies  everywiiere 
about  us,  many  coloured  and  many  shaped,  sometimes  gorgeously 
decked  and  at  other  times  meanly  clad,  sometimes  prominently 
manifested  and  at  other  times  scarcely  perceptible.  Man  v»'ill 
worship.  It  seems  to  be  as  natural  for  him  to  have  something  in 
the  shape  of  religion  as  it  is  for  him  to  have  a  place  to  dwell  in. 
And  there  may  not  be  a  greater  variety  in  the  habitations  which 
lie  constructs,  than  in  the  religions  which  he  adopts.  The 
gradation,  in  the  one  case,  varying  from  the  gorgeous  palace  to  the 
hole  dug  in  the  earth,  may  not  be  more  than  the  gradation  in  the 
other,  —  var}T.ng  from  a  purely  spnitual  Christianity,  to  the  lowest 
form  of  fetichism  or  nature-worship.  And  not  more  true  is  it  that 
man  will  have  a  religion,  than,  if  left  to  himself,  he  v/ill  choose  a 
corrupt  one,  or  corrupt  a  spiritual  one  iuto  a  system  of  formalism. 
Here  is  a  principle  in  man  which  leads  him  out  of  himself  to 
worship  and  perform  religious  services.  That  principle,  in  a  holy 
being,  vrould  fix  his  thoughts  and  afiections  on  the  most  excellent 
glory,  and  the  forms  v,-hicli  he  employed  v/ould  only  be  used  as 
symbols  of  eternal  realities,  or  means  by  which  to  rise  up  to  the 
Supreme  Good.  But  that  principle  in  man,  as  he  now  is, 
participates  in  the  depravity  of  his  nature ;  and  while  it  goes  forth 
after  a  religion,  it  is  one  which,  though  demanding  much  bodily 
service,  lies  very  lightly  on  the  conscience  and  heart ;  one  which 
says,  go  tliis  round  and  that,  but  seldom  or  never  summons  the 
soul  to  an  earnest  conflict  with  the  power  of  evil.  Man  will  have 
a  religion,  but  depraved  man  will  have  a  formal  instead  of  a 
spiritual  one, —  one  consisting  in  mere  outward  observances,  in 
preference  to  one  requiring  the  homage  of  the  heart  and  the  con- 
secration of  the  life.  The  philosophy  of  formalism  is,  therefore, 
easily  explained.  It  is  the  result  of  two  opposing  forces.  The  one 
of  which  will  not  let  man  live  witbout  a  religion,  and,  if 
undisturbed  by  hostile  influences,  would  lead  liim  spiritually  to 
worship  God  who  is  a  spirit.  The  other  is  of  the  earth  earthy, 
and,  by  its  greater  potency,  prevents  the  former  in  the  natural 
man  from  rising  above  rites  and  ceremonies,  above  the  symbol  and 
tlie  lettered  creed.  An  adjustment  or  compromise  of  the  claims  of 
two  rival  parties  takes  place.  The  one  pointing  the  thougbts  and 
affections  vipward  to  God,  and  tlie  other  seeking  to  draw  them 
av\'oy  from  Him.     Both  are  persuaded  to  meet  and  shake  hands 


OF    THE    POWi:Pv    OF    GODLINESS.  15U 

over  a  religious  form,  and  tluis  the  former  13  hoodwinked  while  the 
latter  triumphs. 

Our  object,  more  especially,  is  to  notice  tlie  formalism  that 
lies  within  the  domain  of  revealed  truth,  or  that  is  thrown  up 
within  the  pale  of  the  visible  church.  But  before  doing  so,  we 
maj  glance  at  some  of  the  formalism  that  lies  beyond.  In  fact, 
that  is  formalism,  be  it  baptized  pagan  or  Christian,  natural  reli- 
gion or  revealed,  which,  though  bearing  the  name  of  a  religious 
belief,  exerts  no  influence  in  transforming  the  character,  and  jn-o- 
duces  no  love  and  likeness  to  God.  The  religions  of  the  ancient 
heathen  world  were  generally  of  this  descrii^tion.  What  were  the 
creeds  and  rites  of  Greece  and  Eome,  but  splendid  and  imposing- 
systems  of  formalism?  Objects  of  religious  worship  met  the 
Greek  or  Eoman,  wherever  he  turned  his  eyes.  Every  street 
down  which  he  passed,  every  house  into  which  he  entered,  every 
fountain  at  which  he  di-ank,  and  the  summit  of  every  little  liill  on 
which  he  stood,  reminded  him  of  the  divinities  that  he  was  to 
adore.  Eeligion  blended  itself  with  almost  every  p-iece  of  daily 
business  that  he  performed,  with  almost  every  journey  that  he 
took,  and  with  nearly  every  amusement  that  he  witnessed.  There 
were  numerous  and  magnificent  temples  into  which  he  could 
enter.  There  was  a  gorgeous  and  attractive  mythology  witli 
which  he  was  familiar.  There  were  statues  and  paintings  every- 
where, on  v/hich  unrivalled  art  depicted  to  his  vieAV  things  sacred 
and  divine.  And  there  were  rights  and  ceremonies  of  the  most 
engrossing  description  wdiich  he  was  ever  called  upon  to  observe. 
But,  amid  all  this  sensible  pomp  and  grandeur,  there  was  no  pro- 
vision for  the  wants  of  tiie  inner  man.  Heathenism  had  no 
line  to  reach  the  depths  of  human  depravity,  and  no  power  to 
raise  man  up  from  his  degradation,  to  break  the  spell  by  which 
he  was  bound  to  sensual  objects,  and  to  set  his  spirit  free.  It  had 
no  object  of  religious  v/orship  fitted  to  call  forth  love,  veneration, 
gratitude  ;  and  no  body  of  truth  that  could  be  instrumental  in  puri- 
fying and  ennobling  man's  mental  powers,  in  connecting  him 
with  the  higher  world,  and  renewing  him  after  the  image  of  God. 
It  was  a  system  every  way  fitted  to  gratify  and  strengthen  the 
tendency  in  human  nature  to  rest  in  mere  external  symbols,  re- 
gardless of  spiritual  and  invisible  realities.  Tlie  heathen  duly 
went  his  round  of  religious  observances,  but  it  was  merely  a  round 
of  formalism. 

Much  of  the  same  thing  constitutes  the  religion  of  many  of  our 
men  of  taste  and  science.  "VYe  give  forth  no  sweeping  condemna- 
tion against  philosophers  as  a  class.  Not  a  few  of  them  have 
been,  and  are,  spiritually  minded  men, — men  who,  while  prosecut- 
ing enthusiastically  their  researches  into  nature,  have  held  high 
converse  with  nature's  God.     But,  agai]ist  a  large  proportion  of 


IGO  roRMALisM  ;  or,  the  denial 

versant  with,  and  have  much  admiration  for,  the  material  tvpes. 
But  there  they  rest.  As  if  afraid  of  being  counted  pietists  or 
fanatics,  they  guard  their  researches  effectually  from  the  intrusion 
of  the  living  God,  and  shrink  from  having  their  language  imbued 
witli  any  thing  apj)roaching  to  a  deep  devotional  feeling.  In  the 
case  of  such  individuals,  the  existence  and  providential  agency 
of  the  Holy  One  may  be  admitted,  but  the  admission  is  only  formal, 
not  elevating,  and  consecratmg.  There  would  be  no  difficulty  in 
getting  them  to  acknowledge  that  the  Great  Eternal  Spirit"^sits 
behind  all  those  wondrous  creations  that  meet  their  eye,  that  the 
heavens  are  bright  with  his  glory,  and  the  earth  full  of  his  praise ; 
but  there  is  a  difficulty  in  getting  them  to  nWovv  that  truth  to 
occupy  its  legitimate  position  in  their  minds,  and  to  exert  its 
legitimate  influence  over  their  thoughts  and  speculations.  There 
is  in  them  no  lack  of  sensibility  to  the  grand  and  beautiful  assem- 
blage of  natural  phenomena.  They  may  feel  a  kindling  of  fancy, 
and  an  aggrandisement  of  thought,  in  looking,  from  some  emi- 
nence, over  a  magnificent  region,  rich  in  all  the  elements  of 
sublime  and  graceful  scenery ;  or,  in  taking  a  telescopic  view  of 
the  innumerable  worlds  that  move  harmoniously  throughout  the 
fields  of  space  ;  but  there  is  apparently  a  sad  want  of  the  capacity 
of  rising  from  the  grandeur  and  loveliness  of  creation  up  to  the 
infinitely  greater  grandeur  and  loveliness  of  creation's  God,  —  a 
sad  want  of  being  moved  and  subdued  under  the  impression  that 
He  who  is  supremely  good  reigns  over  all  these  scenes,  is  present 
in  every  star  and  atom,  witnesses  every  thought  and  feeling,  and 
will  one  day  call  us  to  account.  The  world  has  tolerated" not  a 
few  books  in  the  shape  of  travels  and  journals,  in  wliich  the 
writers  have  been  more  careful  to  tell  us  how  many  miles  they 
passed  over  in  a  day,  how  they  slept  and  were  fed,  than  to  make 
us  acquainted  with  the  moral  and  physical  aspects  of  the  country 
and  people  where  they  sojourned.  These  writers  are  not  more 
chargeable  with  a  want  of  good  taste  and  natural  sensibility,  than 
are  those  philosoplicrs  and  men  of  genius  to  wliom  we  have 
alluded,  chargeable  with  being  insensible  to  the  glory  of  the 
Divine  character,  while  impressed  with  the  loveliness  and  grandeur 
of  the  Divine  works.  We  would  not  liave  our  men  of  science  and 
cultivated  taste  to  turn  theologians,  and  mingle  doctrinal  discus- 
sions and  prayers  with  their  descriptions  of  mental  and  material 
])henomena ;  but  we  would  have  them  to  rise  up  from  the  magni- 
ficent symbols  that  meet  their  eye,  to  the  High  and  Holy  One 
whose  perfections  they  shadow  forth.  "  It  is  unfortunate,"  says 
John  Foster,^:'  "  I  have  thought  within  these  few  minutes,  —  while 
looking  out  on  one  of  the  most  enchanting  nights  of  the  most 
interesting  season  of  the  year,  and  hearing  the  voices  of  a  com- 

*  Foster's  Essays,  pp.  IG,  17. 


or   THE    POWEIl   OF   GODLINESS.  181 

pany  of  persons,  to  whom  T  can  perceive  that  this  soft  and  solemn 
shade  over  the  earth,  the  calm  sky,  the  beautiful  stripes  of  cloud, 
the  stars,  and  the  waning  moon  just  risen,  are  things  not  in  the 
least  more  interesting  than  the  walls,  ceiling,  and  candle-light  of 
a  room."  But  it  is  still  more  unfortunate  that  there  are  men  of 
genius  fascinated  and  elevated  by  the  grand  scenes  of  earth  and 
sky,  and  yet  unattracted  by  the  excellency  of  God,  of  which  all 
that  material  grandeur  and  gracefulness  is  but  a  type.  It  is  sad 
to  think  that  the  thought  of  nature's  magnificence  should  so  often 
fail,  in  the  case  of  men  in  whom  that  thought  is  vivid,  to  bring  in 
its  train  the  more  ennobling  thought  of  the  unrivalled  glory  of  the 
Author  of  Nature  Himself 

"  These  are  Ihy  plorious  works.  Parent  of  good, 
Almighty  I  Thine  this  universal  frrime, 
Thns  wondrous  fair:  Thyself  how  wondrous  then, 
Unspeakable :" 

It  is  not  of  such  a  writer  as  the  author  of  "  Cosmos,"  who  has 
given  us  a  great  picture  of  nature  without  any  reference  to  the 
living  God,  that  we  are  now  speaking.  He  has,  at  least,  in  this 
melancholy  exclusion,  been  consistent  with  his  own  established 
belief,  "  that  the  forces  inherent  in  matter,  and  those  whicli  govern 
the  moral  world,  exercise  their  action  under  the  control  of  pri- 
mordial necessity."  But  it  is  of  those  of  our  men  of  taste  and 
science,  who,  while  acknowledging  the  truth  about  God  as  the 
Creator,  Preserver,  and  Moral  Governor  of  the  universe,  seem  to 
rest  in  the  mere  natural  phenomena;  to  concentrate  there  all 
their  thoughts,  and  spend  there  all  their  feelings;  and  can  carry 
on  their  researches,  and  give  us  graphic  and  useful  descriptions 
of  the  material  world,  witliout  being  led  themselves,  or  attempting 
to  lead  others,  to  the  contemplation  of  Him  wlio  has  set  his  glory 
above  the  heavens.  This,  whatever  other  epithet  may  be  applied 
to  it,  must  be  denounced  as  mere  formalism. 

The  tendency,  in  the  domain  of  revealed  religion,  to  hal6  in 
mere  forms,  was  strongly  evinced  by  the  Hebi-ew  people.  The 
Levitical  economy,  containing  a  large  machinery  of  divinely- 
appointed  rites  and  ceremonies,  though  cumbei-some  compared 
with  the  dispensation  of  the  Gospel,  was  admirahly  adapted  to  the 
state  of  the  Israelites,  in  conveying  to  their  minds,  and  preserving 
in  the  midst  of  them,  tliose  elements  of  Divine  truth  wliich  have 
been  fully  developed  in  all  their  simplicity  and  majesty  in  the 
Gospel  age.  But  their  history,  as  faitliliilly  recorded  in  Scripture, 
shows  that  their  besetting  sin  was  to  idolize  the  symbol,  instead 
of  rising  from  it  to  the  thing  signified;  to  go  the  mere  round  of 
external  observances,  neglectful  of  the  cultivation  of  the  heart 
and  that  spiritual  worship  which  God  requires.  And  it  deserves 
notice  that,  in  the  same  record  where  the  typical  and  ritual  system 
is  so  fully  and  minutely  detailed,  the  most  strict  cautions  are 

M 


162  formalism;  or,  the  denial 

given  against  restinsf  in  it;  and  tlie  most  terrible  denunciations 
are  uttered  against  tliose  who  substitute  the  symbol  in  the  place 
of  the  invisible  reality.  The  burden  of  pro]ihecy,  while  leading 
the  mind  forward  to  the  glory  of  the  latter  days,  and  seeking  to 
concentrate  the  thoughts  in  Him  who  was  emblematically  repre- 
sented in  evei-y  lamb  that  bled  on  the  Hebrew  altars,  contained 
often  a  strong  rebuke  to  the  hollow  formalism  that  prevailed. 
The  divinely-appointed  rites  were  repudiated  as  worthless,  when 
men  converted  tbem  into  idols,  and  failed  to  be  led  by  them  to  the 
high  spiritual  realities.  "  Hath  the  Lord,"  said  Samuel  to  Saul, 
"as  great  delight  in  burnt-ofierings  and  sacrifices,  as  in  obeying 
the  voice  of  the  Lord?  Behold,  to  obey  is  better  than  sacrifice, 
and  to  hearken  than  the  fat  of  rams."  "  To  what  purpose  is  the 
multitude  of  your  sacrifices  unto  me  ?"  was  the  question  which 
Jehovah  addressed  to  the  punctilious  formalists  among  the  ancient 
Hebrews.  This  system  of  religiou'=;  ceremonialism  appeared  in 
all  its  odiousness  in  the  Pharisees  of  the  Gospels.  And  it  was 
against  the  men  who  were  scrupulously  exact  in  paying  tithe  of 
mint,  and  anise,  and  cummin,  while  regardless  of  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law, — judgment,  mercy,  and  faith,  that  the  meek 
and  lowly  Saviour  pronoimced  the  most  tremendous  woes.  Eigid 
adherence  to  bare  rites  went  hand  in  hand  with  the  most  gross 
corruptions.  Men  would  stand  up  and  stoutly  contend  for  the 
mere  letter  of  the  law,  while  shamelessly  violating  its  spirit.  The 
formalism  of  the  system  was  complete,  and  the  Amen,  the  faithful 
and  true  witness,  denounced  the  hypocrisy  of  its  worshippers. 

The  new  economy  is  distinguished  from  the  old,  by  its  greater 
simplicity  and  spirituality.  ]t  has  no  gorgeous  and  imposing 
ritual.  The  schoolmaster,  npces'sary  for  the  instruction  of  the 
Jews,  has  been  dismissed.  The  shadow  has  vanished  away  and 
given  place  to  the  substance.  And  the  hour  has  come 
when  neither  in  this  mountain  exclusively,  nor  yet  at  Jerusalem, 
men  should  be  required  to  worship  the  Fatiier,  but  when  the  tme 
worshi])pers  should  worship  Him  in  spirit  and  truth;  for  the 
Father  seeketh  such  to  worship  Him.  But  under  the  shadow  of 
Clnistianity,  formalism  soon  grew  up,  and  extended  its  cold, 
withering  influence,  for  ages,  over  the  church.  Judaizing  teachers 
—  the  masters  of  forms — insinuated  themselves  into  the  first 
Christian  societies,  and  insisted  on  the  observance  of  abrogated 
ceremonies  as  indispensable  to  salvation.  Apostolic  vigilance  and 
7,eal,  in  a  great  measure,  thwarted  their  ])ernicious  efforts,  and 
preserved  the  truth  of  God  pure  and  unclogged.  But,  soon  after 
the  ajiostles  had  fallen  asleej),  and  the  spii'itual  energy  which  they 
had  infused  into  the  church  had  diminished,  the  tendency  to  exalt 
the  material  above  the  spiritual,  and  bind  up  the  living  element  of 
truth  in  a  system  of  forms,  appeared  almost  unchecked.  The 
symbols  were  aggrandized,  and  occupied  the  place  of  the  grand 


OF   THE    POWER   OF    GODLINESS.  1G3 

realities.  The  inherent  efficacy  of  the  sacraments  was  preached, 
instead  of  the  doctrine  of  tiie  cross.  And  that  deadly  dishonouring 
system  of  pinning  men's  faith  to  the  priest  and  the  mere  external 
rite,  of  identifying  haptism  with  regeneration,  and  of  making  the 
tithe  of  mint,  and  anise,  and  cummin,  a  suhstitute  for  the  practice, 
and  a  plea  for  the  omission,  of  tlie  weightier  mattei's  of  the  law, 
almost  everywhere  ])revailed.  History  hears  witness  to  the  fact, 
that  the  dai'kest  period  in  the  annals  of  the  church,  when  the 
question  might  have  been  pat,  Were  the  Son  of  man  to  come, 
would  he  find  faith  in  the  earth  ?  was  the  period  when  Christianity 
was  ritual  bound,  ministers  and  people  as  intent  on  mere  forms  as 
the  heathen  on  idols. 

Such  is  the  result  of  the  Eomish  theory  of  fellowship.  Instead 
of  making  the  church,  as  the  apostle  Peter  did,  a  Uving  body, 
composed  of  faithful  mea,  who  "  as  lively  stones,  are  built  up  a 
spiritual  house,  an  holy  priesthood,  to  ofler  up  spiritual  sacrifices, 
acceptable  to  God  by  Jesas  Chribt;"  it  has  set  up  a  lifeless  arti 
ficial  system  of  mosaic  work,  the  essential  qualifications  to  a  name 
aiid  place  in  which  are,  not  the  faith  of  the  truth  and  the  love  of 
the  Saviour  as  manifested  in  a  life  of  moral  loveliness,  but  a 
strict  attention  to  rites  and  ceremonies.  It  matters  not,  according 
to  this  theory,  how  much  glorying  there  may  be  in  the  cross  of 
Christ  on  the  part  of  individuals,  and  how  brightly  in  them  the 
features  of  the  new  creature  may  shine,  if  the  party  watch-word 
cannot  be  pronounced,  and  the  party  rite  cannot  be  submitted  to, 
there  is  no  recognition  of  them  as  belonging  to  the  Israel  of  God. 
It  is  in  accordance  with  this  theory,  that  some  Romish  mission- 
ai'ies  have  baptized  large  companies  of  the  heathen  in  a  mass, 
pronounced  over  them  the  name  of  Christ  before  they  really  knew 
who  Christ  was,  set  them  down  as  children  of  the  truth  before 
the  truth  had  gained  an  inlet  into  their  minds,  and  reported  them 
as  accessions  to  the  Holy  Catholic  Church, —  which  is  just  like 
the  swelling  of  a  body  with  diseased  flesh.  "  We  find,"  Mr.  Morell 
truly  remarks,  "  as  the  result  of  this  theory,  multitudes  of  the  most 
debased,  most  unscrupulous,  most  antichristian  of  mankind, 
standing  in  due  right  and  order,  as  channels  of  Christian  truth 
to  the  world  ;  while,  on  the  other  hand,  we  find  multitudes  of  the 
humble,  the  holy,  the  self-denying,  hopelessly  thrust  out  beyond 
the  pale  of  broti'ierhood,  as  not  being  in  the  legitimate  succession 
of  olficial  validity.  If  the  fellowship  of  the  faithful  is  to  depend 
upon  such  principles  as  these,  then  to  make  it  all  intelligible  to 
the  reason  or  consistent  with  the  moral  sense  of  numkind,  we  need 
altogether  a  difierent  interpretation  of  the  whole  natp.re  and  de- 
sign of  Chiistianity  from  what  we  have  in  the  life  of  Christ  and 
the  writings  of  the  apostles."-:'     There  are,  doubtless,  not  a  few 

*  Philosophy  of  Religion,  p.  268. 

M    2 


104  formalism;  or,  the  denmal 

spiritually-minded  men  in  the  Piomish  ChnrcL,  but  tliey  are  spiri- 
tually-minded in  spite  of  her  theory  of  feliowshi}).  As  a  whole 
it  is  a  gigantic  system  of  formalism. 

Formalism  has  not.  however,  been  restricted  to  the  ample  and 
imposing  shades  of  popery.  It  has  taken  root  also,  grown  up,  and 
been  carefully  fostered  in  the  bosom  of  Protestantism.  The  Oxford 
ritual,  as  it  has  been  called,  makes  a  very  near  approach  to  that  of 
Rome.  And  the  doctrines  propounded  by  the  Tractarians,  viewed 
as  a  whole,  come  in  dh-ect  antagonism  with  those  grand  spiritual 
principles  of  the  Reformation,  which  have  been  so  happily  exjiressed 
by  Merle  D'Aubigne :  The  Word  of  God  only;  the  Grace 
OF  Christ  only;  and  the  Work  of  the  Spirit  only.  Their 
theory  of  the  church,  and  of  the  efficacy  of  its  rites,  is  the  very 
theory  that  quenches  spiritual  life,  dries  up  the  goodly  sap,  blights 
every  gi-een  thing,  and  superinduces  a  dark  and  leaden'  system  of 
formalism.  The  church  and  the  priest  come  between  the  soul  of 
the  sinner  and  the  Saviour ;  and  the  church  and  the  sacraments 
are  made  to  dispense  those  spiritual  influences  for  which  we,  as 
Bible-taught,  look  to  the  church's  Head.  Let  men  be  instructed 
as  multitudes  of  our  fellow  countrymen  are,  that  the  sacraments 
are  the  wells  of  Divine  grace,  that  they  are  efficacious  only  as 
administered  by  the  hands  of  e2)iscoiially  ordained  men,  and  that 
perishing  souls  can  find  the  bread  of  life  only  in  this  particular 
fold, — and,  within  the  pale  of  the  Protestant  church,  will  soon  be- 
come rampant  a  system  that  will  eat  out  the  very  life  of  the  Gospel, 
—  a  system  having  the  form  of  godliness  but  denying  the  power 
thereof.  "  If  we  be  Christians  ecclesiastically,  it  is  enough  :  all 
besides  is  illusion," — is  the  engrafted  word  which  thousands  of 
cultivated  and  uncultivated  minds  have  in  our  day,  received  within 
the  church  of  Cranmer.  "  And  such  in  fact,"  says  Mr.  Isaac  Tay- 
lor, "  are  every  day  seen  to  be  the  products  of  the  ecclesiastical 
theory  which  v/e  denounce  as,  at  this  time,  tlie  antagonist  of  Spiri- 
tual Christianity.  In  its  recent  revival  it  has  shed  a  cold  arrogance 
into  many  bosoms  that  once  glowed  with  Christian  affection  ;  and, 
at  the  same  time,  it  has  drawn  such  aside  (in  how  many  sad  in- 
stances !)  from  an  enlightened  regard  to  the  substantial  trutlis  of 
the  Gospel ;  while  they  give  all  their  cares  to  frivolous  and  servile 
observances."* 

The  snake  is  to  be  found  creeping  among  the  grass,  as  well  as 
displaying  its  sinuous  form  under  some  stately  plant  or  tree.  And 
formalism  is  not  a  sin  peculiar  to  Eomanism  or  to  a  Romanized 
Protestantism.  It  is  to  be  met  with,  not  only  under  the  imposing 
shade  of  the  cathedral  pile,  clad  in  white  vestments,  kneeling  be- 
fore the  altar,  clasping  to  the  bosom  a  crucifix,  and  going  puncti- 
liously the  proscribed  round  of  gorgeous  ceremonies ;  but  it  often 


OF   THE    POWER    OF   GODLINESS.  165 

has  a  place  in  the  plain  built  chapel,  and  on  the  low  wooden  form 
where  no  sacramental  theory  has  ever  been  propounded,  where  a 
creed  tlioroughly  evangelical  has  been  adopted,  and  where  nothing 
but  the  pure  spiritual  Gospel  of  Christ  has  been  heard.  It  may 
have  a  much  more  ample  shelter,  and  be  much  more  countenanced 
amid  g]-eat  architectural  splendour,  venerated  altars,  and  a  rich 
ceremonial;  but  it  can  and  does  exist  in  the  absence  of  everything 
external  that  is  fitted  to  rivet  the  eye,  regale  the  ear,  and  engToss 
the  heart.  Men  may  place  a  false  dependence  on  the  simplest  ob- 
servances as  well  as  on  the  most  artificial  and  splendid,  and  there 
may  lurk  as  deadly  and  hateful  a  spirit  of  self-righteousness  under 
an  appearance  of  puritan  meekness,  as  ever  did  in  the  bosom  of 
the  ostentatious  Pharisee  who,  in  the  temple  and  before  God's 
throne,  boasted  of  his  fast-days  and  the  regular  payment  of  his 
tithes.  It  matters  not  whether  the  forms  be  few  or  many,  bald  or 
costly  decked, — if  they  are  unduly  confided  in,  shifted  from  the 
position  which  they  may  lawfully  occupy  as  means,  to  that  which 
in  God's  sight  they  never  can  occupy  as  a  ground,  and  if  the  observ- 
ance of  them  is  made  a  substitute  for  piety  and  holy  obedience, 
—  the  system  must  be  branded  as  mere  formalism. 

1.  Our  first  remark  on  such  a  system  is,  its  lUter  icortlilessness 
to  satisfy  the  great  uants  of  liuman  nature.  The  wants  of  man,  in 
a  religious  point  of  view,  are  obvious.  He  is  guilty  before  God, 
and  needs  expiation.  He  is  the  subject  of  depraved  principles, 
and  needs  to  be  regenerated.  Formalism,  whether  gorgeous  or 
naked,  can  no  more  remove  the  condemning  sentence  from  the 
head,  and  root  out  depraved  principles  from  the  heart,  than  saying 
to  a  destitute  brother  or  sister,  be  ye  warmed  and  filled,  can  profit, 
if  we  give  them  not  those  things  that  are  needful  to  the  body.  To 
look  amid  a  mere  ceremonial  for  some  power  to  atone  and  purify, 
were  as  foolish  and  vain  as  to  seek  the  living  among  the  dead.  And 
yet  this  is  a  folly  which  multitudes  of  cidtivated  and  uncultivated 
minds  are  repeating  every  day.  Forms  are  necessaiy,  in  this  world 
at  least,  to  display  and  maintain  the  power  of  godliness.  But  it 
should  never  be  forgotten  that  in  the  forms  the  Divine  efficacy  is 
not  inherent.  The  internal  religious  sentiments  and  emotions 
must  express  themselves  in  some  outward  shape,  and  neither 
reason  nor  revelation  forbids  that  the  external  institutions  of  piety 
should  be  imposing  and  graceful.  But  as  man  cannot  feed  upon 
flowers,  nor  his  natural  life  be  sustained  by  the  most  enrapturing 
music ;  so,  amid  the  most  strict  observance  of  even  divinely  ap- 
pointed rites,  he  will,  if  halting  in  them,  remain,  in  the  scriptural 
sense  of  the  expression,  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.  The  use  of  a 
ladder  is  to  ascend  by  it  to  some  lofty  eminence ;  but  if  men  were 
merely  to  run  up  and  down  the  steps,  and  imagine  that  they  had 
reached  the  height  to  which  it  pointed,  and  that  they  had  beheld 
the  view  which  the  summit  commanded,  they  woidd  be  regarded 


106  formalism;  or,  the  denial 

as  under  a  strawge  hallucination.  The  hallucination  is  not  less 
real,  and  infinitely  more  dangerous,  in  the  man  who  goes  the 
round  of  religious  observances,  stops  short  at  them,  builds  upon 
them,  and  deems  himself  all  the  while  to  have  attained  to  the 
position  and  character  of  a  child  of  God  and  an  heir  of  heaven. 
It  betrays  a  littleness  of  conception  in  reference  to  the  character 
and  law  of  the  great  I  am,  to  suppose  that,  by  mere  outward  rites 
and  ceremonies,  men  are  to  be  pardoned,  sanctified,  and  saved. 
It  manifests  a  great  lack  of  spiritual  discernment,  to  regard  a 
punctilious  attention  to  a  ritual,  and  a  reliance  on  forms,  as  occu- 
pying the  place,  and  answering  the  ends,  of  faith  and  repentance, 
holy  love  and  spiritual  obedience.  It  is  acting  as  if  the  reverse  of 
the  proposition —  and  not  the  proposition  itself —  were  true  :  man 
looks  upon  the  outward  ajipearance,  but  God  looks  upon  the 
heart. 

The  worthlessness  of  such  a  reliance,  in  reference  to  the  two 
great  wants  of  human  nature, —  deliverance  from  guilt  and  from 
the  dominion  of  evil,  is  attested  by  observation  and  experience. 
Men  have  run,  countless  times,  round  the  circle  of  prescribed 
observances,  leaning  on  the  symbol  without  rising  up  to  the  thing 
signified  ;  and  it  has  either  been,  in  their  experience,  a  round  of 
anguish,  or  a  dead  tread,  in  which  they  were  destitute  of  a  sense 
of  reconciliation  and  peace  with  God.  Sacrifice  after  sacrifice  has 
been  ofl;ered,  the  yoke  in  a  thousand  forms  has  been  borne,  words 
of  what  seemed  holiest  prayer  have  been  daily  uttered,  hymns  of 
sweetest  harmony  and  devout  fervour  have  been  chanted ;  and, 
after  the  excitement,  produced  by  the  pomp  of  ceremony,  by  a 
religion  of  refined  ceremonial,  or  a  religion  of  primitive  simplicity, 
has  subsided,  the  soul  has  been,  like  a  stricken  deer,  ill  at  ease,  and 
panting  again  for  the  excitement  of  the  chase.  The  splendid  ritual 
and  the  plain,  the  divinely  appointed  institute  and  the  human,  the 
sacrament  stamped  with  Heaven's  authority  and  that  bearing  only 
man's,  have,  each  and  all  of  them,  deokired,  the  merit  that  atones 
and  the  grace  that  pardons  are  not  to  be  found  in  them. 

The  inefficacy  of  the  system  to  regenerate,  and  assimilate  men 
to  the  likeness  of  God,  is  as  manifest  as  itspowerlcssnessto  remove 
the  burden  of  guilt.  Be  it  in  the  shape  of  a  court  ceremonial,  of 
things  appealing  to  refined  taste  and  sentiment,  or  of  the  common 
sacred  decencies  of  the  sabbath-day,  if  it  be  a  religion  merely 
formal,  men  will  observe  its  rites,  and  pass  through  its  forms,  with- 
out throwing  off  any  more  of  their  impurity  and  receiving  any  more 
of  the  beauties  of  holiness,  than  if  they  ])aced  to  and  fro  the  floor 
of  a  gallery  amid  cold  marble  statues.  The  man  of  taste  has  stood 
amid  some  glorious  amphitheatre  of  nature,  and  felt  his  soul  elated 
by  the  majesty  of  the  liills,  the  green  loveliness  of  the  valleys,  the 
splendour  of  the  setting  sun,  and  the  concert  of  the  rejoicing 
creation.     He  has  witnessed  the  same  magnificence  and  felt  its 


OF   Tna    POWER   OF   GODLINESS.  167 

power  over  and  over  again.  But  when  the  excitement  of  the  ima- 
gination has  been  subdued,  and  the  charm  has  passed  away  like 
a  dream,  and  the  man  has  fallen  back  upon  himself,  or  mingled 
with  the  world,  his  heart  has  been  found  without  God,  and  his 
life  reflecting  not  a  ray  of  the  Divine  image.  Thus  making  it 
manifest  tliat  the  formalism  of  taste,  gratified  though  it  be  by  the 
grand  and  graceful  in  sceneiy,  has,  in  itself  and  independent  of 
influences  from  above,  no  efficacy  whatever  to  purily  the  heart  and 
clothe  man  in  moral  beauty.  The  formalist  has  gone  up,  demurely 
and  punctually,  to  the  temple  at  the  hour  of  prayer,  and,  whether 
it  has  been  amid  the  architectural  splendour  of  the  cathedral 
where  the  pealing  organ  carries  the  soul  aloft,  and  gorgeous  cere- 
monies are  observed;  or  whether  it  be  in  the  humble  meeting- 
house where  psalms  are  plainly  sung,  and  the  Gospel  is  plainly 
preached,  he  has  felt  himself  attracted  and  regaled  as  with  a  lovely 
song.  But  it  has  been  a  mere  round  of  formal  excitement,  which 
has  never  moved  the  depths  of  the  heart  to  harmony  with  tho  will 
of  God,  and  thrown  no  hallowed  comeliness  over  the  life.  Thus 
shosving  that  the  ritual  of  a  sanctuary,  be  it  splendid  or  simple, 
can  of  itself  no  more  regenerate  the  soul  of  man,  than  the  ritual 
of  material  nature.  Men  may  speak  of  the  efiicacy  of  the  sacra- 
ments, but  daily  observation  makes  it  too  palpable,  that  multitudes 
who  are  baptized  and  received  to  the  Lord's  Su]}per,  even  by  those 
claiming  to  be  the  successors  of  the  apostles,  differ  little  or  nothing 
in  theii  temper  and  conduct  from  tlie  ungodly  world  araund  them. 
And  the  same  thing  is  evinced  in  the  observance  of  other  forms, 
when  these  are  made  halting-places  on  which  the  mind  unduly 
leans.  Whatever  observances  men  may  substitute  for  the  finished 
work  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  the  regenerating  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  be  they  costly  or  mean,  imposing  or  simple,  appointments 
of  Heaven  or  appointments  of  earth,  their  worthlessness  to  satisfy 
the  wants  of  man's  moral  nature  will  be  made  evident. 

2.  Our  second  remark  is,  that,  in  mere  formalism,  ilw  pleasure 
found  in  sjnrilual  religion  is  not  experienced.  It  is  impossible  that 
a  should.  The  creation  is  not  so  joyous  and  full  of  life  when  a 
mass  of  dark  clouds  intercepts  the  rays  of  the  sun,  as  when  that 
sun  beams  brightly  forth  on  hill  and  valley,  and  covers  heaven 
and  earth  with  light  as  with  a  garment.  God  is  a  sun.  He  is  the 
infinite  good.  Notiiing  but  a  living  sensible  communion  with 
Him,  can  displace  heaviness  from  the  heart,  and  shed  a  holy  hap- 
pirjer)S  over  the  life.  Formalism  interposes  thick  shadows  between 
the  fountain  of  iiglit  and  the  human  soul.  It  is  as  when  a  man 
halts  on  the  somewhat  bleak  and  rugged  borders  of  a  lovely  region, 
without  ever  enteiing  into  the  beautiful  territory  itself.  Fonns 
were  designed,  by  Him  who  knoweth  our  frame,  to  be  the  means 
by  which  we  might  ascend  to  the  enjoyment  of  Himself.  But 
when  the  mind  halts  in  the  symbol,  instead  of  rising  from  it  to 


IGS  formalism;  or.,  the  deiNiai 

the  thing  signified  ;  when  the  man  iiins  up  and  down  the  ladder, 
instead  of  reaching  the  eminence  which  commands  the  glorious 
prospect,  he  loses  the  enjoyment  insepai'ahle  fi-ora  intercourse  with 
the  hlissful  realit3\  It  has  often  been  remarked,  that,  in  those 
countries  and  ages  where  religion  has  appeared  in  her  most  gaudy 
trim,  —  ages  characterized  by  the  architectm'al  splendour  of 
churches,  and  by  the  observance  of  a  gorgeous  round  of  rites  and 
ceremonies,  —  the  spirital  element  in  worship  has  been  feeble  and 
scarcely  perceptible.  And  there,  too,  the  light,  loveliness,  and 
joy,  inse])arable  from  the  Gospel  truth,  have  been  wanting;  and 
gloom  and  slavish  fear  have  prevailed  in  tlieir  room.  When  one 
passes  from  a  country  that  lies  under  the  deadly  grasp  of  civil  and 
ecclesia3tico,l  despotism,  to  another  where  political  and  religious 
liberty  is  richly  enjoyed,  it  is  like  making  a  transit  from  a  region 
of  thick  gloom  to  one  of  joyous  sunshine.  And  the  dilFerence  is 
not  less  discernible  between  a  religious  community  where  the  spi- 
ritual clement  is  buried  in  the  formal,  and  one  in  which  the  former 
pervades  and  gives  life  to  the  latter;  or  between  an  individual 
who  has  a  feeling  of  the  Divine  presence  and  a  relish  of  theDivmc 
excellence,  and  one  whose  idol  is  the  church  he  attends  and  the 
rites  in  which  he  engages.  It  is  not  the  ritual  in  itself,  at  least,  it 
is  not  the  divinely  appointed  ritual,  that  is  incompatible  with  or 
obstructive  of  spiritual  life  and  joy,  but  the  substitution  of  it  as 
means  in  the  place  of  ends.  David  and  Asaph,  who  lived  imder 
the  Levitical  economy,  so  full  and  minute  in  its  provisions  regard- 
ing forms,  lost  not  sight  of  the  sjnritual  element,  and  had  a  vivid 
experience  of  the  joy  inseparably  connected  with  it.  The  mere 
formalist  is  a  stranger  to  that  life  of  godliness  Avhich  enables  a^ 
man  to  say, — when  he  looks  abroad  upon  the  fields  of  creation,  or 
when  he  has  entered  into  his  closet,  shut  his  door,  and  is  conscious 
that  no  eye  sees  him  and  no  ear  hea.rs  him  but  the  eye  and  ear  of 
God, — "  whom  have  I  in  heaven  but  thee?  and  there  is  none  upon 
earth  that  I  desire  beside  thee."  "  There  be  many  that  say,  Who 
will  show  us  any  good  ?  Lord,  lift  thou  up  the  light  of  thy  coun- 
tenance upon  us." 

Formalism  may  be  found  in  all  religious  communities,  for  it  is 
the  besetting  sin  of  human  nature;  but  we  look  in  vain,  in  the 
religion  of  the  formalist,  for  those  robes  of  fine  linen,  as  joyous  as 
pure,  which  clothed  such  men  as  Leighton  and  Doddridge,  Baxter 
and  Edwards,  and  thousands  of  others  whom  the  world  never 
heard  of,  and  of  whom  the  world  was  not  worthy.  There  is  a 
pleasure  which  a  man  of  taste  and  sensibility  enjoys  in  contem- 
plating the  grand  and  beautiful  objects  of  nature,  but  the  pleasure 
is  poor  and  transient  compared  with  what  the  same  man  experiences 
when,  in  filial  confidence,  he  views  them  as  the  creations  of  his 
Father.  Byron,  amid  the  lovely  scenery  of  the  isles  of  Greece, 
never  felt  what  the  great  metaphysician  of  New  England  felt, 


OF   THE    POWER    OF   GODLINESS.  169 

when,  as  he  tells  ns,  he  "  spent  much  of  his  time  in  viewing  the 
clouds  and  sky,  to  behold  the  sweet  glory  of  God  in  these  things; 
in  the  mean  time  singing  forth,  with  a  low  voice,  his  contempla- 
tions of  the  Creator  and  Kedeemer."  There  is  a  pleasure,  too,  felt 
under  the  shadow  of  the  cathedral  pile,  derived  from  the  imposing 
splendour  of  the  place,  the  enrapturing  music,  and  the  rich  cere- 
monial;  hut  it  is  a  pleasure  different  in  kind,  and  vastly  inferior 
in  degree  to  what  is  experienced  by  the  man,  observant  it  may  be 
of  the  same  forms,  who  rises  through  them  to  divine  fellowship 
with  the  Father  of  spirits,  and  the  God  of  his  salvation,  And 
there  is  a  pleasure,  also,  in  going  up  to  the  humble  chapel,  amid 
the  hallowed  calm  of  the  sabbath  morning,  and  bearing  a  part  in 
the  routine  of  its  simple  services;  but  that  pleasure,  likewise,  may 
have  little  or  none  of  the  life  and  joy  of  godliness,  and  be  as  nnliko 
the  holy  inward  happiness  of  the  man  who  worships  God  in  spirit 
and  in  truth,  as  earth  is  unlike  heaven.  Men  do  not  gather  grapes 
of  thorns,  nor  figs  of  thistles;  neither  do  they  experience  that  joy 
which  is  a  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  in  a  religion  which  is  merely  formal 
and  not  spiritual. 

3.  Our  third  remark  is,  that  formalism  ever  has  a  tendency  to 
intolerance.  Men,  in  proportion  as  they  are  imbued  with  the 
spirit  of  the  Gospel,  have  enlarged  heai'ts.  Love  is  represented,  in 
almost  every  page  of  the  New  Testament,  as  the  characteristic  of 
the  Christian.  It  is  not  an  attachment  to  men  merely  because 
they  are  members  of  this  or  that  particular  society,  but  because 
they  belong  to  the  church  of  the  living  God.  It  is  not  entwined 
around  a  man  because  he  bears  a  humanly-devised  name,  but  be- 
cause he  wears  in  his  bosom,  and  shows  in  his  life,  the  Saviour's 
image.  This  holy  principle  looks  beyond  the  outward  appearance, 
and  fastens  its  regard  on  that  image,  though  it  be  found  in  a 
Lazarus  sitting  in  rags  and  seeking  to  be  fed  with  the  crumbs  of 
the  rich  man's  table.  Nor  does  it  confine  its  regards  to  those  who 
ai'e  united  to  the  common  Saviour,  and  are  made  partakers  of  the 
common  salvation.  It  looks  on  the  wide  world  with  an  eye  of 
compassion,  and  feels  towards  it  those  stirrings  of  benevolence 
which  seek  to  save  that  Avhich  is  lost.  It  is  like  the  sun  in  the 
firmament  which  confines  not  his  radiance  to  any  little  spot  on 
the  siu'face  of  the  earth,  but  spreads  it  over  the  wide  fields  of 
creation.  "  Its  going  forth  is  from  the  end  of  the  heaven,  and 
its  circuit  unto  the  ends  of  it:  and  there  is  nothing  hid  from  the 
heat  thereof." 

Formalism  engenders  a  spirit  the  reverse  of  all  this.  It  is  sec- 
tarian. It  is  pent  up  within  the  pale  of  its  own  community;  and 
whatever  rehgious  zeal  it  possesses,  is  spent  on  its  own  creed  and 
ceremonies.  We  see  this  in  the  Pharisees  of  the  Gospels.  They 
were  proud,  haughty  separatists.  Men  who  stood  aloof  from 
others  on  the  ground  of  mere  outward  observances.     They  erected 


170  formalism;  or,  the  denial 

the  banner  of  party  distinction  in  the  teuijue  wliere  all  meet 
on  a  common  level.  Tliey  said  to  others,  by  their  looks  and 
actions,  "  Stand  by  yonrsolt';  come  not  near  to  me,  for  T  am  holier 
than  yon."  We  see  this  in  that  church  which  arrogates  to  itself 
the  exclusive  claim  of  being  "  Holy  Catholic."  The  most  massive 
system  of  religious  formalism,  it  has  ever  been  the  most  intolerant 
in  tlieory  and  practice.  Out  of  the  Komish  pale  there  is  no 
salvation, —  is  an  infallible  dogma  which  every  good  catholic  is 
bound  to  believe.  Jt  is  instilled  into  the  minds  of  youth,  by  the 
catholic  school  book.  It  is  tlie  vital  element  that  pervades  Papal 
decrees.  It  ever  and  anon  di'ops  from  the  priest's  lips,  in  the  hearing 
of  young  and  old,  of  peasant  and  noble.  And,  in  accordance  with 
this  monstrous  dogma,  members  of  other  conununions  are  con- 
signed over  to  eternal  perdition,  though  they  may  have  been  the 
most  excellent  ones  of  the  earth,  men  of  seraphic  piety,  the  very 
salt  of  the  earth,  and  the  lights  of  the  world.  Sectarian  exclusive- 
uess  is  strikingly  characteristic  of  Oxford  Tractarianism.  It  re- 
fuses even  the  name  of  church  to  whatever  Protestant  body  lies  with- 
out the  pale  of  its  own  communion,  arrogates  the  commission  to 
administer  Christian  ordinances  to  episcopally  ordained  ministers 
only,  denounces  dissent  as  apostasy  from  the  true  church,  and 
considers  it  sinful  to  have  fellowship  with  any  beyond  the  epis- 
copal border.  Hence  the  intolerance,  which  has  sometimes  been 
manifested  in  high  places,  in  prohibiting  the  catholic-spirited  men 
in  that  portion  of  the  church  irom  co-operating  in  good  works  with 
Cln-istian  men  of  otlier  denominations.  But  it  behoves  us  not  to 
be  unmindful  that  the  same  exclusively  sectarian  feeling  may  exist 
in  per.sons,  mere  formalists,  sitting  side  by  side  with  each  other  in 
the  same  chui-ch  pew.  Whoever, — instead  of  humbling  his  heart 
before  God.  and  recognising  in  the  meanest  worshipper  a  child  of 
the  same  bountiful  leather,  and  alike  welcome  with  himself  to  a 
participation  in  the  fulness  of  his  house. —  assumes  a  conceited 
sentiment  of  his  own  superior  sanctity,  such  as  removes  him  in. 
fancy  to  an  elevation  apart  from  other  men,  is  filled  with  the  same 
self-rigliteous  and  intolerant  spirit  which  actuated  the  Pharisees, 
and  which  Jehovah,  by  the  prophet,  so  strongly  reprobates:  "These 
are  a  smoke  in  my  nose,  a  fire  that  burneth  all  the  day!" 

The  transition  from  such  separatism  to  a  rancorous  fanaticism, 
is  easy  and  natural.  The  full-blown  separatist  not  only  stands 
aloof  from  other  men  and  disregards  their  claims,  but  he  assumes 
towards  them  an  attitude  of  scowling  defiance.  He  carries  his 
hateful  spirit  into  the  very  exercises  of  the  sanctuary,  and  utters 
his  denunciations  at  the  altar.  The  formalist,  wrapped  up  in  the 
robe  of  bis  own  righteousness,  feigns  a  "  God  I  thank  thee,"  that 
he  is  not  as  other  men  are,  extortioners,  unjust,  but  that  he  fasts 
twice  in  the  week  and  gives  tithes  of  all  that  he  has.  Vv'ith  iiis 
tongue  blesses  he  God,  even  the  Father;  and  therewith  curses  bo 


OF    THE    rOWEll    OF    GODLINESS.  171 

men,  which  are  made  after  the  similitude  of  God;  out  of  the  same 
mouth  proceed  blessing  and  cui-sing.  and  we  behold  in  him  a 
fountain  sending  forth  at  the  same  place  sweet  water  and  bitter. 
Tliis  odious  system  stings  like  a  serpent,  and  bites  like  au  adder, 
at  every  species  of  spiritual  piety  that  crosses  its  path.  It  varies 
in  the  manifestation  of  its  intolerance,  from  the  man  who,  like  a 
sentinel,  goes  the  round  of  his  own  church  observances,  and  in- 
wardly says,  "the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of  the  Lord  are 
we,"  to  the  man  who  would  erect  the  gibbet  and  kindle  the  faggot 
for  schismatics  and  heretics,  and  j^ersuade  himself  that  in  thus 
acting  he  was  doing  God  service. 

4.  Our  fourth  remark  is,  t  at  such  a  system  is  diametriccdli/  op- 
posed to  the  spirit  and  precepts  of  the  Gospel.  It  says,  "our  fathers 
worshipped  in  this  mountain."  This  is  the  church  in  which  alone 
is  given  under  heaven  that  name  whereby  we  can  be  saved.  The 
Lord  and  Master  says,  the  exclusive  system  has  ceased.  "  The 
hour  is  come  when  ye  shall  neither  in  this  moimtain,  nor  yet  at 
Jerusalem,  worship  the  Father.  God  is  a  spirit,  and  they  that 
worship  Him,  must  worship  Him  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  Formal- 
ism says,  we  who  fast  so  often,  pray  so  fervently,  and  attend  on 
the  sacraments  so  punctually,  are  God's  people.  Evangelism  re- 
plies, "he  is  not  a  Jew,  which  is  one  outwardly;  neither  is  that 
circumcision  which  is  outwciaxl  in  the  flesh:  but  he  is  a  Jew,  which 
is  one  inwardly;  and  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the 
spirit,  and  not  in  the  letter ;  whose  praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of 
God."  The  one  says,  "we  have  Abraham  to  our  father,"  and  are 
in  the  line  of  the  true  x\postolical  succession.  The  other  says, 
"we  are  the  circumcision,"  the  true  seed  of  Abraham,  "  which 
worship  God  in  the  spirit,  and  rejoice  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  have 
no  confidence  in  the  Hesh."  The  one  says,  perform  this  ceremony 
and  that,  go  this  round  of  observances  and  that,  and  ye  shall  be 
justified.  The  other,  in  holy  indignation,  e.xclaims,  "if  righteous- 
ness come  by  the  law,  then  Christ  is  dead  in  vain ;  therefore  by 
the  deeds  of  the  law  there  shall  no  flesh  be  justified."  The  one 
says,  baptism  is  regenei-ation.  only  be  baptized,  come  to  the  sacra- 
mental table,  and  ye  shall  be  saved.  The  other  says,  "  neither 
circumcision  availeth  any  thing  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a  new 
creature."  Formalism  looks  chiefly  at  what  a  man  does,  irrespec- 
tive of  his  character  and  motives.  Jt  takes  notice  of  his  long  and 
numerous  ]u-ayers,  while  it  winks  at  him  oppressing  tlie  poor,  and 
devouring  widows'  houses.  It  approves  of  kis  strict  observance  of 
the  decencies  and  rites  of  the  Sabbath  day,  wh'ile  it  frowns  v.pou 
him  healing  the  diseased,  raising  an  ox  out  of  the  i)it,  or  perform- 
ing any  other  works  of  niercy  in  the  same  sacred  period.  It  is 
heedless  of  the  state  of  heaVt  in  which  a  man  approaches  God's 
altar,  while  it  is  careful  to  see  that  iiis  hands  are  washed,  and 
that  his  raiment  is  tidy.     It  will  furnish  him  with  a  reason  for 


172  FORMALISM. 

neglecting  a  moral  duty,  and  throw  an  air  of  sanctimonious  pre- 
tence over  the  violence  done  to  natural  afFection,  provided  he  is 
mindful  of  the  claims  of  the  temple  treasury.  It  teaches  him  to 
say  "  Oorban,"  it  is  a  gift:  and  thus  frees  him  from  the  obligation 
of  relieving  his  father  and  mother.  There  is  not  less  communion 
hetvv^een  light  and  darkness,  than  there  is  between  such  a  system,, 
and  the  spiritual  Christianity  taught  by  Jesus  and  his  apostles. 
"  This  people,"  said  the  Great  Teacher,  "  draweth  nigh  unto  me 
with  their  mouth,  and  honoureth  me  with  tlieir  lips;  but  their 
heart  is  far  from  me.  But  in  vain  do  they  worship  me,  teaching 
for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men."  Christianity  does  not 
overlook  what  a  man  may  have  done,  but  it  looks  more  to  what 
a  man  is.  It  gives  no  countenance  whatever  to  despise  sacred 
rites  and  seasons,  but  it  says  to  the  man  who  attaches  an  undue 
importance  to  them,  while  neglecting  the  weightier  matters  of  the 
law,  "  These  things  ought  ye  to  have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the 
others  undone." 

"There  are  two  ways  of  destroying  Christianity,"  remarks 
D'Aubigne,  "one  is  to  deny  it,  the  other  to  displace  it.  To  put 
the  church  above  Christianity,  the  hierarchy  above  the  word  of 
God;  to  ask  a  man,  not  whether  he  has  received  the  Holy  Ghost, 
but  whether  he  has  received  baptism  from  the  hands  of  those  who 
are  termed  successors  of  the  apostles  and  their  delegates :  all  this 
may  doubtless  flatter  the  pride  of  the  natural  man,  but  is  funda- 
mentally opposed  to  the  Bible,  and  aims  a  fatal  blow  at  the  re- 
ligion of  Jesus  Christ,  If  God  had  intended  that  Christianity 
should,  like  the  Mosaic  system,  be  chieily  an  ecclesiastical,  sacer- 
dotal, and  hierarchical  system,  he  would  have  ordered  and  estab- 
lished in  the  New  Testament,  as  He  did  in  the  Old.  But  there 
is  nothing  like  this  in  the  New  Testament.  All  the  declarations 
of  our  Lord  and  of  his  apostles  tend  to  prove  that  the  new  religion 
given  to  the  v/orld,  is  '  life  and  spirit,'  and  not  a  new  sj^stem  of 
priesthood  and  ordinances.  'The  kingdom  of  God,'  saith  Jesus, 
'  cometh  not  with  observation:  neither  shall  they  say,  Lohere! 
or  lo  there  !  for  behold  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you.'  '  The 
kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink;  but  righteousness,  and 

peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.' Let  us  not,  then, 

esteem  the  bark  above  the  sap,  the  body  above  the  soul,  the 
form  above  the  life,  the  visible  church  above  the  invisible,  the  priest 
above  the  Holy  Spirit.  Let  us  hate  all  sectarian,  ecclesiastical, 
national,  or  dissenting  spirit;  but  let  us  love  Jesus  Christ  in  all 
sects,  whether  ecclesiastical,  national,  or  dissenting." '-i^  "  And  as 
many  as  walk  according  to  this  rule,  peace  be  on  them,  and  mercy, 
and  upon  the  Israel  of  God." 

*  Geneva  and  Oxford,  by  D'Aubign6. 


173 


PAET  THE  SECOND. 


InSitclitg  in  its  ^lalm  &m$t$. 

GENERAL  CAUSE.  —  SPECIFIC  CAUSES: SPECULATIVE  PHILOSOPHY - 

SOCIAL     DISAFFECTION  —  THE      CORP.UPTIONS      OF    CHRISTIANITY - 
RELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH. 


CHAPTER  I. 

GKNKRAL    CAUSE. 

Causes  of  Iiifidelity  etbical  rather  than  intellectual  — The  Will  has  much  to  c^ 
with  it  —  Moral  evidence  not  irresistible — Existence  of  God  does  not  admit  of 
demonstration  —  Remark  of  Dr.  Arnold  —  Pantheism  and  naturalism  traced  to 
avei-sion  of  heart  —  SufSciency  of  Christian  evidences  —  Jewish  unbelief  origin- 
ated in  a  moral  cause  —  Speculative  and  practical  Infidelity  have  same  origin  — 
Bible  account  of  the  matter. 

It  is  evident  that  unbelief,  generally  speaking,  can  originate  in 
only  one  of  two  sources  ;  either  in  a  deficiency  of  evidence,  or,  in 
a  state  of  mind  and  heart  on  which  the  clearest  and  strongest 
evidence  has  no  jjower.  The  causes  of  infidelity,  we  are  per- 
suaded, are  more  ethical  than  intellectual.  And  this  persu'^sion 
is  greatly  strengthened  hy  the  perusal  of  some  of  the  productions 
of  our  modern  infidel  %Yriters.  "  Nothing  can  be  more  contempt- 
ible," says  Professor  Garbett,="  "than  the  argumentative  resources 
of  modern  infidelity.  It  iloes  r.ot  reason,  it  only  postulates;  it 
dreams  and  it  dogmatizes.  Nor  can  it  claim  invention."  This  wit- 
ness is  true.  Indeed,  we  venture  to  assert,  that  the  general  strain 
of  argument  brought  to  bear  against  Christianity  by  its  modern 
assailants,  would  not  be  tolerated  for  a  moment  within  the  pro- 
vince of  purely  literary  criticism.  The  strong  determination  to 
withstand  everything  in  the  shape  of  reasonable  evidence,  contrasts 
very  mnch  with  the  feeble  argumentation  by  which  many  of  the 
trutls  of  religion  are  set  aside.  Be  it  atheism  or  pantheism, 
natuialism  or  spiritualism,  in  different  ism  or  formalism,  the  will 
has  much  to  do  with  it.  Moral  evidence  is  the  appropriate 
proof  of  moral  truth.      All  moral  evidence  is  cumuiatiTe;  but, 

*  Modern  Philosophical  Infidelity,  p.  5. 


171  GKNEItAL    CAUSE. 

however  strong  it  may  be,  it  is  never  irresistible.     An  indocile 
reason  can  ward  it  off. 

The  existence  of  God,  for  example,  does  not  admit  of  demon- 
strative, but  of  moral  certainty.  And.  tliough  supported  by  a  vastly 
preponderating  amount  of  proof,  room  is  left  for  the  ravils  of  a 
strongly-prejudiced  unbelief.  The  argtunent  from  design  is  ons 
of  great  power,  and  though  it  does  not  of  itself  lead  us  to  the  High 
and  Holy  One,  it  points  us  very  clearly  thither.  But  the  ground 
is  by  no  means  tree  from  difficulties.  Faith,  supported  by  the 
immensely  overbalancing  amount  of  clear  evidence,  triumphs  over 
these,  v/hereas  the  unbelieving  heart  yields  to  them.  Still  stronger 
is  the  testimony  to  this  primal  truth  given  by  orir  own  inward 
consciousness — a  testimony  that  outweighs  all  atheistical  assump- 
tions and  arguments  ;  but,  in  spite  of  it,  man  can  befool  himself, 
and  say  in  his  heart,  there  is  no  God.  The  disrelisli  of  the  truth 
that  God  is,  strengthens  itself  in  the  comparatively  small  residue 
of  phenomena  that  seems  to  conflict  with  it,  and  there  repels  the 
conviction  arising  from  the  irrefragable  proof  on  the  other  side. 
Dr.  Arnold,  reasoning  on  the  supposition  that  the  intellectual 
difficulties  are  balanced,  remarks,  "here  is  the  moral  fault  of  un- 
belief,—  that  a  man  can  bear  to  make  so  great  a  moi-al  sacrifice, 
as  is  implied  in  renouncing  God.  He  makes  tlie  greatest  moral 
sacrifice  to  obtain  partial  satisfaction  to  his  intellect:  a  believer 
ensures  the  greatest  moral  perfection,  with  paitial  satisfaction  to 
his  intellect  also;  entire  satisfaction  to  the  intellect  is,  and  can 
be,  obtained  by  neither."  =:=  The  choice  in  such  a  case  must  be 
resolved  into  the  inclination,  or  tlie  wish  to  have  it  that  there  is 
no  God.  But  matters  are  not  really  so  balanced.  The  difficulties 
greatly  preponderate  on  tlie  side  of  unbelief  And  for  a  man 
to  accept  of  the  proposition  that  God  is  not,  with  the  mass  of 
m.onstrosities  and  difficulties  that  attend  it,  and  thereby  renounce 
the  affirmative  pro])osition  that  God  is, —  a  ])roposition  so  well 
substantiated,  and  for  which  there  is  an  intellectual  necessity, — 
indicates  very  plainly  the  leanings  of  the  heart.  Lord  Bacon 
says:  "  none  deny  there  is  a  God,  but  those  for  whom  it  maketh 
thkt  there  were  no  God." 

The  personality  of  the  Divine  Being,  irrespective  of  its  being 
interwoven  with  the  language  of  the  Bihle,  and  imparting  to  it  a 
burning  energy,  is  mucli  more  rational  than  the  ])antheistic  doc- 
trine. It  does  not  admit,  however,  of  strict  demonstration.  We 
mav  argue  very  conclusively  in  favour  of  it,  from  our  own  person- 
ality, and  maintain  that,  since  personality  is  a  peifection.  God 
nmst  possess  it  in  the  highest  degree,  otherwise  He  would  be 
inferior  to  onrselves;  and  not  only  so,  but  we  could  conceive  of 
God   as  a  more   glorious   being  than  He  really  is,  which  is    an 

*  Dr.  Arnold's  Life  and  Correspoudence. 


GENERAL    CAUSE.  175 

abeui-dity.  We  may  strengthen  our  proof  by  the  eonsideration 
that  men  in  general  feel,  in  the  most  solemn  and  affecting 
moments  of  their  lives,  that  God  is  a  real  person.  And  to  this 
we  may  add,  that,  without  the  idea  of  a  personal  God,  "  we  cannot 
really  eX])lain  the  oiigin  or  the  order  of  the  universe ;  and  that 
it  is  a  mere  assumption  to  assert,  that  personality  is  in  its  veiy 
nature  finite  —  since  it  is  the  finiteness  of  man's  attributes,  and 
that  alone,  which  gives  the  finiteness  to  his  personality."*  But 
the  heart  can  repel  all  this  proof;  and  bring  to  its  aid,  if  not  the 
force  of  argument,  the  language  of  the  mystic  and  the  principles 
of  a  dreaming  philosophy.  The  reluctance  to  think  of  God  as  a 
living  Person,  holy,  just,  and  good,  and  with  whom  we  have  to  do, 
is  greater  than  the  incapacity.  It  is  in  the  delirium  of  self-adora- 
tion, in  the  swellings  of  a  pride-intoxicated  heart,  that  men  break 
loose  from  a  sense  of  responsibility,  ignore  the  existence  of  the 
Personal  Creator  and  Judge,  and  yield  to  the  temptation  —  ye 
shall  be  as  gods.  No  one  can  read  the  rhapsodies  of  such  a  man 
as  Emerson,  without  perceiving  that  the  state  of  the  heart, — a 
heart  puffed  up  with  the  delusive  notion  of  its  own  divinity, — 
lies  at  tlie  bottom  of  his  imbelief.  And  the  appeal  is  made,  not 
to  men's  sober  judgment,  but  to  their  rebellious  propensities, 
when  they  are  told  that  they  have  the  resources  of  the  world  in 
their  own  souls,  and  that  all  their  actions  are  forms  of  piety. 

Naturalism  has  its  root  in  the  same  soil.  In  so  far  as  argument 
is  concerned,  it  has  scaicely  a  leg  to  stand  upon.  The  evidences 
of  a  Supreme  Presiding  Intelligence  are  as  manifest  as  those  of  a 
Supreme  Creative  Power.  The  development  hypothesis  is  nothing 
better  than  a  wild  dream,  which  is  fast  disappearing  before  the 
light  of  advancing  science.  Astronomical  and  geological  re- 
searches are  rapidly  cutting  away  the  ground  on  which  any  such 
theory  is  sup])osed  to  rest,  whether  as  applied  to  the  heavens 
above  or  to  tlie  earth  beneath.  I'he  nebular  hypothesis,  which 
would  remove  God  beyond  the  limits  of  the  visible  universe,  and 
account  for  the  changes,  as  well  as  for  the  orderly  movements  in 
the  heavens,  without  his  presiding  agency,  was  merely  thrown 
out  as  a  conjecture  at  first,  and  is  now  being  falsified  by  the  dis- 
coveries of  the  telescope.  And,  as  Professor  Whewell  remarks, 
"  Science  negatives  the  doctrine  that  men  grew  out  of  apes,  that 
language  is  the  necessary  development  of  the  jabbering  of  such 
creatures,  and  reason  the  product  of  their  conflicting  appetites."! 
Besides,  it  is  doubtless  more  rational  to  suppose  that  God  con- 
tinues to  govern  the  world  which  He  has  made  than  that  He  has 
abandoned  it.  "  When  a  man,"  says  Bacon,  •'  seeth  the  depend- 
ence of  causes  and  the  works  of  P)'ovidence,  then,  according  to 
tlie  allegoiy  of  the  poets,  he  will  easily  believe  that  the  highest 

•  Smith's  ■Relatione  of  Failb  and  Philosophy,  11.  13. 
+  Indications  of  thv  Creator,  p.  8. 


170  GENERAL    CAUSE. 

link  of  nature's  chain  must  needs  be  tied  to  the  foot  of  Jupiter's 
chair."  Having  interposed  in  a  miraculous  manner  at  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world,  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  that  God  v/ould  in- 
terpose again,  for  an  end  worthy  of  his  character,  and  bearing  on 
the  highest  interests  of  the  human  race.  The  position  taken  up 
by  Strauss, — that  miracles  are  impossible,  is  utterly  indefensible. 
It  may  consist  with  his  philosophy,  but  not  with  the  common- 
sense  truth  that  God  is  in  the  heavens,  and  that  He  doeth  what- 
soever He  pleaseth.  But  the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Providential 
Governinent  does  not  admit  of  demonstrative  certainty.  The 
facts  lying  without,  and  the  voice  of  conscience  within,  speak 
loudly  in  proof  of  it.  The  evidence  is  sufficient  to  justify  our 
faith,  but  it  is  not  irresistible.  There  are  other  facts  which  seem 
to  conflict  with  the  doctrine.  Darkness  and  difficulties,  which 
have  been  felt  by  the  best  men  in  every  age,  beset  us  in  this  field 
cf  inquiry.  But  what  is  the  darkness  to  the  light?  The  diffi- 
culties arise  from  our  limit(^d  capacity  and  kno\Ying  but  in  part. 
Our  vision  is  restricted  to  a  point  of  a  universal  system;  and 
analogy  warrants  the  conclusion,  that,  were  our  range  of  view 
widened,  these  difficulties  would  lessen,  if  not  disappear.  The 
difficulties  are  much  greater  on  the  side  of  naturalism,  besides 
the  monstrosities  that  are  involved  in  the  hypothesis.  And  when 
men  choose  the  latter,  and  thereby  extrude  God  from  the  throne 
of  his  natural  government,  or  compliment  Him  out  of  it,  there  is 
reason  to  suspect  that  the  thing  is  done  with  the  view  of  exclu- 
ding Him  from  his  moral  dominion.  We  must  fall  back  on  the 
state  of  the  heart,  in  seeking  for  the  great  reason  why  men,  in  the 
face  of  such  preponderant  evidence  for  divine  i)rovidence,'  will 
have  it  that  "God  doth  not  know,  and  that  the  Almighty  doth 
not  consider." 

Christianity  is  based  upon  evidence.  The  reason  why  evidence 
is  necessary,  is  to  be  found  in  our  moral  constitution  as  rational, 
discriminating,  accountable  agents;  and  in  the  fact  that,  from  the 
existence  of  evil  in  the  world,  we  were  otherwise  liable  to  decep- 
tion in  reference  to  our  highest  interests.  It  could  never  be  a  man's 
duty  to  believe  in  a  revelation  claiming  to  itself  the  authority  of 
lieaven,  unless  that  revelation  bore,  legibly  on  its  front,  heaven's 
signature,  or  was  in  some  way  attended  with  heaven's  evidencing 
power.  The  evidence  that  attests  the  truth  of  Christianity,  vast, 
varied,  and  of  great  cumulative  power,  though  it  be,  is  not,  how- 
ever, irresistible.  No  man  is  warranted  to  expect  it  to  be  so. 
Faith  is  a  moral  act,  and,  while  resting  on  a  strong  groundwork 
of  proof,  it  must  have  some  difficulties  over  which  to  triumph. 
Origen,  speaking  of  the  difficulties  in  the  Bible  revelation,  and  of 
those  in  the  revelation  of  nature,  says:  "In  both  we  see  a  self- 
concealing,  self-revealing  God,  who  makes  Hinisclf  known  only  to 
those  who  earnestly  seek  Him ;  in  both  are  found  stimulants  to 


GENERAL    CAUSK.  177 

faith,  and  occasions  for  nnbelief"     "  There  is  h'sht  enough,"  savs 
Pascal,  "for  those  who  sincerely  wish  to  see;  and  chtrknes"  e'nougli 
for  those  of  an   opposite  desci-ii)tion."     Mr.  Newman  tells  us^it 
"  supersedes  the  authoritative  force  of  outward  miracles  entirely," 
to  say  that  "  a  really  overpowerino-  miraculous  i)roof  would  have 
destroyed  the  moral  character  of  faith."     'J'his,  however,  is   not 
argument,  hut  a  foolish  dogmatic  assertion.    The  Christian  miracles 
are  of  "  a  convincing  and  stupendous  character,"  and  yet  not  so 
overpowering  as  the  axiom  that  a  whole  is  greater  tlian  its  ])art; 
and  we  lack  sagacity  to  perceive  whei-e  lies  the  contradiction  be- 
tween these  statements.     Evidence  is  obligatory  on  man,  not  be- 
cause it  is  overpowering  or  irresistible,  but  because  it  ]>reponderates. 
Indeed,  on  the  former  supposition,  to  talk  of  obligation  were  an 
absurdity.     The  judge  on  the  bench  is  every  day"  deciding  im- 
portant cases,  not  on  the  ground  that  the  evidence  is  absolutely 
perfect,  but  because,  notwithstanding  objections,  the  ))roof  on  the 
one  side  preponderates ;  and  no  reasonable  man  questions   the 
validity  of  his  decision.     The  external  and  internal  evidences  of 
Christianity  constitute  a  mass  of  proof  fully  sufficient  to  justily 
our  belief  in  its  truths;  and,  as  if  aware  of  the  force  of  it,  our 
modern  infidels  attack  one  part  of  it,  and  represent  us  as  if  resting 
on  that,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  rest.     Difficulties  there  are,  both 
in  the  record  and  in  the  outward  evidence,     l^ut  what  are  these 
difficulties  compared  with  the  greatly  preponderating  amount  of 
clear  heavenly  proof?     The  difficulties  arise  out  of  our  ignorance. 
Analogy  warrants  us  to  conclude  that  they  are  so  only  relatively, 
not  absolutely.     And  they  are  but  as  the  small  dust  in\he  bahtnce 
compared  with  the  thousand  paradoxes  which  a  man  must  be  ])ve 
pared  to  swallow  who  denies  that  Christianity  is  an  autboi-itativo 
revelation  from  heaven.     The  infidel  is  reconciled  to  these  jjara 
doxes.  on  the  alleged  gi-ound  of  objections  which  appear  as  no- 
thing compared  to  them.     And  this  furnishes  a  strong  presump- 
tion that  the  will  has  much  to  do  with  infidelity,  whether  it  he  named 
deism  or  spiritualism.     "  Nor  do  we  well  know  what  midtitudes, 
who  neglect  religion  on  accoinit  of  the  alleged  uncertainty  oi'  its 
evidence,  could  reply,  if  God  were  to  say  to  them,  'And  vet  on 
such  evidence,  and  that  far  inferior  in  degree,  vou  have  never  hesi- 
tated to  net,  when  your  own   tenvporal  interests  were  concerned. 
You  never  fenred  to  commit  the  ba,i-k  of  your  worldly  fortunes  to 
that  fluctuating  element.     In  many  cases  you  believe  on  the  testi- 
mony of  others,  what  seemed  even  to  contradict  your  own  senses. 
Why  were  you  so  much  more  scrupulous  in  relation  to  ME?'  "=:= 

The  cause  of  mibelief  among  the  Jews,  for  exam))le.  in  the  days 
of  the  Saviour's  flesh,  could  not  be  a  want  of  evidence, —  for  that 
evidence  was  numerous,  varied,  and  brilliant.     Many,  in  our  day, 

*  Rogers's  Deasoa  and  Faith,  p.  36 


178  OEKERAL    CAUSE. 

afifect  to  despise  the  evidence  from  miracles,  for  no  better  reason, 
we  are  persuaded,  than  that  it  is  against  them.  But  the  Great 
Teacher  rested  his  claims  on  the  fact  of  his  miracles.  "  If  I  do 
not  the  works  of  my  Father,"  said  He,  "  believe  me  not.  But  if  I 
do,  though  ye  believe  not  me,  believe  the  works ;  that  ye  may 
know  and  believe  that  the  Father  is  in  me  and  I  in  Him."  Their 
fathers  had  beheld  the  mighty  works  of  the  Lord  in  the  wilderness, 
in  the  land  of  Ham,  and  at  the  Red  Sea ;  but  never  did  they  Avit- 
ness  such  a  visible  agency  multiplying,  in  quick  and  varied 
succession,  its  deeds  of  benevolent  and  miraculous  power,  as  was 
daily  beheld  by  their  children.  They  bowed  before  the  majesty 
of  that  evidence  itself,  they  paid  to  it  a  willing  homage,  they  were 
fully  persuaded  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah,  so  long  as  the  golden 
dream  of  an  earthly  monarchy  remained  unbroken;  and,  on  the 
strength  of  that  evidence,  would  have  proceeded  at  once  to  make 
Him  their  king.  It  was  not  till  they  felt  his  doctrines  thwarting 
their  fondest  wishes, — not  till  they  perceived  that  his  kingdom  had 
no  battle  for  the  warrior,  and  was  unaccompanied  with  confused 
noise  and  garm.ents  roiled  in  blood,  not  till  they  perceived  that  his 
subjects  were  to  be  composed  of  the  pure,  the  meek,  and  the  poor 
in  spirit, —  that  they  hid,  as  it  were,  their  faces  from  Him.  It  was, 
therefore,  a  moral  cause  that  produced  Jewish  unbelief, —  a  state  of 
mind  that,  relatively  to  itself,  weakens  evidence  the  most  powerful, 
and  darkens  evidence  the  most  brilliant.  His  religion  ran  counter 
to  their  moral  tendencies,  condemned  their  favourite  pursuits,  and 
frowned  on  their  grovelling  expectations.  And  in  this  originated 
that  carping  spirit  in  which  they  ever  after  listened  to  his  dis- 
courses, that  deadly  enmity  with  which  they  incessantly  pursued 
Him,  even  when  performing  among  them  works  of  unparalleled 
grandeur  and  benevolence.  It  was  because  their  deeds  were  evil, 
that  they  hated  his  light.  When  He  was  in  the  world,  the  world 
hated  Him,  because  He  testified  of  it  that  the  works  thereof  are 
evil. 

The  same  remarks  are  substantially  applicable  to  the  hostility 
which  has  been  shown  to  the  pure  Gospel  in  every  succeeding  age. 
If,  for  convenience,  we  divide  infidelity  into  the  s])eculative  and 
the  practical,  it  will  be  found  that  both  these  forms,  however 
different  may  be  the  specific  process  by  which  the  mind  in  each 
case  settles  down  in  it,  may  be  traced  to  the  same  moral  cause — 
the  repugnance  in  human  nature  to  what  is  purely  s])iritual  and 
divinely  authoritative.  Could  we,  for  instance,  have  looked  into 
the  hidden  chambers  of  imagery,  and  beheld  the  jirocesses  of 
thought  and  feeling  in  which  many  talented  infidels  investigated 
the  Scriptiu-e  testimony,  our  wonder  would  not  have  been  that 
tliey  landed  in  unbelief  The  religion  of  Jesus,  wlien  summoned 
to  the  bar  of  their  understanding,  has  met  with  such  treatment  as 
an  innocent  man  meets  with  when  he  comes  before  a  liostile  jury. 


GENERAL    CAUSE.  179 

Rather,  we  should  say,  they  never  suffer  themselves  to  behold 
Cliristianity  in  all  its  radiant  glory,  nor  to  mark  its  lofty  towers 
and  stable  bulwarks;  for,  as  they  advance  on  their  way  to  the 
temple  of  truth,  they  are  ever  and  anon  raising  around  them  a 
thick  cloud  of  dust  and  darkness.  In  most  cases,  we  doubt  not. 
Christianity  and  its  evidences  have  never  been  examined  by  such 
men  at  all.  In  our  times,  it  is  fashionable,  in  many  quaiters.  to 
ignore  the  evidences  altogether,-  to  pass  them  over  with  a  proud 
sneer  as  things  antiquated  and  effete,  and  to  judge  tiie  Gos])e]  ac- 
cording to  the  conceptions  of  the  individual  mind.  In  other 
words,  the  case  is  prejudged,  before  the  witnesses  ai-e  exfunined.  if 
examined  at  all.  And  in  other  cases,  while  an  inquiiy  into  the 
evidences  has  been  entered  upon,  it  has  been  with  a  Juikiug  wisii 
that  the  examination,  after  all,  might  prove  unfa voma hie.  Jn 
such  circumstances,  the  wish  biasses  the  judgment,  and  the  in- 
evitable result  is  that  the  man  can  never  believe  to  be  true  what 
he  wishes  may  be  false. 

Now  this  process,  which  ends  in  unbelief,  has  its  origin  m  the 
aversion  of  the  mind  to  the  high  and  holy  principles  of  the  Gos- 
pel. There  is  a  demand,  made  in  that  Gospel,  of  every  lofty 
imagination,  and  every  high  thought,  beicg  brought  into  c;iptiviiy 
to  Christ,  which  is  repugnant  to  that  reckless  independence  of 
mind  in  which  such  a  sceptic  glories.  To  such  a  nu'nd,  Chris- 
tianity is  too  humbling  ;  its  meek,  and  lowly,  and  crucified  Saviour 
appears  mean  and  uninteresting,  and  he  easily  turns  from  the 
thought  of  Him  who  lias  no  form  or  comeliness  to  tlie  conieuj- 
l^lation  of  some  stormy  hero  of  romance.  Its  strict  moi-aliiy, — 
exercising  a  minute  inspection  over  every  movement  of  the  inner 
man,  and  claiming  to  be  a  discerner  of  the  tlioughts  and  intents 
of  the  heart, —  is  felt  to  be  an  uncomfortable  restraint;  like  an  in- 
dividual who  follows  us  through  every  path  and  winding  wiiich  wo 
take  to  avoid  his  presence.  Above  all,  its  doctrine  of  the  cross. — 
staining,  as  it  does,  all  human  glory,  reducing  the  loltiest  to  a  level 
with  the  meanest  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  making  all  lieavenly 
blessedness  to  depend  on  Him  wlio  was  crucified  as  a  felon  between 
two  thieves, —  outrages  that  high  sense  of  merit  which  would  exalt 
itself  as  the  eagle  and  set  its  nest  among  the  stars.  David  Hume, 
somewhere  in  his  writings,  acknowledges,  as  we  have  aliVHdy 
noticed,  that  his  readings  in  the  New  Testament  were  but  scMuty. 
And  it  is  not  difficult  to  conceive  how  such  a  mind  would  sit  down 
to  the  perusal  of  some  of  the  discourses  of  the  lledeen)er  and  the 
letters  of  his  apostles.  Other  infidels,  of  whrtm  Rousseau  is  ■n\ 
example,  have  paid  an  involuntary  homage  to  the  character  of  the 
Saviour.  They  have  admired  Him  going  about,  like  the  esnbodied 
spirit  of  benevolence,  continually  doing  good.  But  they  have 
shrunk  back  from  the  doctrine  of  the  cross,  and  the  un( oui- 
promising  req[uirements  of  Christ's  laws,  just  as  a  person  with  a 


180  GENERAL    CAUSE.' 

diseased  eye  instinotivoly  retires  into  tlie  sliade  when  the  frail 
organ  is  about  to  be  ex];)osed  to  the  light  of  the  sun.  Mr.  Emerson 
professes  to  reverence  Jesus  Christ  as  belonging  to  the  true  race 
of  prophets,  as  "  the  only  soul  in  history  who  has  appreciated  the 
worth  of  man ;"  and  yet  he  spurns  the  idea  of  receiving  religion 
and  law  from  liis  lips,  and  of  subordinating  his  nature  to  the 
nature  of  Christ.  Mr.  Parker  does  not  conceal  his  hatred  to  "  the 
Popular  Christianity,"  because  it  represents  man  as  fallen  and  de- 
praved, and  makes  so  much  of  the  one  mediator  between  God  and 
man.  And  when  Mr.  Newman  tells  us  that  he  was  forced,  agaiustall 
his  prepossessions,  to  renounce  every  thing  distinctively  Christian; 
and  would  have  us  to  believe  ihat  the  will,  in  his  case,  durst  "not 
dictate,  whereto  the  inquiries  of  the  imderstanding  should  lead  ;":;- 
we  appeal  to  his  "  Phases,"  for  a  refutation  of  such  assertions. 
We  have,  in  such  men,  tlie  pride  without  the  greatness  of  tho 
mighty  fallen  Intellect  in  Milton,  who  said, — 

"  In  my  choice, 
To  reign  is  worth  amhition,  though  in  hell : 
Better  to  reign  in  hell,  than  serve  in  heaven  !" 

Oh  !  these  intolerable  evidences !  Better  far  be  reconciled  to  all 
the  strange  paradoxes  implied  in  disowning  Christianity,  than 
submit  ourselves  to  "  church,  book,  person."!  Such  is  the  choice 
of  men  who  are  labouring  to  undermine  the  historical  verity  of 
the  sacred  writings;  and  who,  baptizing  an  enlightened  attach- 
ment to  them  by  the  ill-sounding  name  of  '  Bibliolatry,'  would  cut 
the  link  asunder,  and  leave  us  to  wander  at  will  after  the  unde 
fined  and  undefmeable  tiling  called  '  absolute  religion.' 

It  is,  in  like  manner,  with  that  cold  insensibility  to  divine  truth, 
—  that  practical  form  of  infidelity  which  frequently  prevails  among 
the  multitude.  There  is  an  unbelief  common  among  many  of  the- 
would-be  giants  of  the  earth,  and  one  th  at  exists  among  the  lowly  walks 
of  other  men.  But  as  the  object  of  their  contempt  or  disregard  is  the 
same,  so  are  the  specific  causes  to  be  traced  to  the  same  great  evil 
principle  —  an  inveterate  love  of  those  practices  and  pursuits 
which  the  light  of  divine  truth  reproves  and  condemns.  There 
are  immense  masses  of  our  population  who  perhaps  never  spent 
five  minutes  of  their  lives  in  considering  whether  the  Bible  were 
a  revelation  froui  God,  or  a  cinmingly  devised  fable.  The  Bible, 
as  a  book,  may  be  found  beneath  their  roof;  but  its  grand  truths 
have  not  been  rightly  apprehended  and  duly  felt,  because  the 
volume  has  seldom  been  oiiened,  and.  when  opened,  not  read  with 
half  the  interest  with  which  they  read  some  fairy  tnle.  The  light 
which  it  afibrds  sViineth  in  the  darkness,  but  the  darkness  admit* 
teth  it  not.  These  individuals  would  perhajis  count  it  impiety  to 
wield  the  weapons  of  the  sceptic  against  the  Gospel,  were  they  able 

♦  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  219.  +  Parker's  Discourse,  p.  372. 


GENERAL    CAUSE.  181 

for  the  task,  and  would  shrink  with  horror  from  the  thought  of  any- 
way traducing  the  divine  Saviour ;  and  yet  tliey  can  pass  from  day 
to  day  as  little  elevated  hy  all  that  is  magnificent  and  sublime,  as 
little  impressed  with  all  that  is  marvellous  in  condescension,  as 
little  attracted  by  all  that  is  beauteous  in  holiness,  as  if  God's  Son, 
in  whom  meet  pre-eminently  all  this  grandeiu-  and  loveliness,  had 
never  manifested  Himself  to  the  world.  This  is  formalism,  and, 
as  a  species  of  imbelief,  this  is  what  the  Gospel  condemns. 

The  Bible  comes  to  us  as  a  message  from  the  skies.  In  it,  God 
utters  his  voice  loudly  and  intelligibly  in  the  ears  of  men.  It  is  a 
message  of  mercy  from  the  thi'one  of  the  Eternal  to  us  the  guilty 
and  rebellious,  making  known  a  divine  Saviour,  and  offering,  on 
the  ground  of  his  atoning  sacrifice,  a  free  and  a  full  salvation.  In 
making  such  declarations,  the  Bible  deals  with  men  as  rational 
and  accountable  agents.  It  has  no  blessings  for  those  who  are  not 
deterred  by  its  threatenings,  nor  won  by  its  promises.  It  presents 
to  the  mind  saving  tinth,  which,  in  order  to  prove  efficacious, 
must  be  believed ;  and,  in  order  to  be  believed,  must  be  carefully 
read  and  rightly  understood.  How,  then,  are  we  to  account  for  the 
melancholy  fact,  that  men  possessing  the  sacred  volume,  and 
acknowledging  it  to  be  a  revelation  from  God,  are  little,  if  at  all, 
influenced  by  the  momentous  statements  which  it  contains  ?  That 
volume  finds  a  place  in  the  house,  but  it  has  no  home  in  the 
heart.  It  is  assented  to  as  the  law  and  the  testimony,  the  only 
infallible  directory  of  faith  and  morals.  But  its  grand  truths  are 
seldom,  if  ever,  made  the  object  of  devout  contemplation;  its  pre- 
cepts are  seldom  taken  as  a  light  unto  the  feet  and  a  lamp  unto 
the  path.  Whence  originates  this  insensibility  to  all  that  is  ma- 
jestic and  merciful,  this  unwillingness  to  bring  the  mind  into  con- 
tact with  the  purifying  and  elevating  truths  of  Christianity,  —  but 
in  a  deceitful  ;  uspicion  that  its  grovelling  earthly  pursuits  would 
be  disturbed,  that  its  moral  tendencies  would  be  thwarted,  that  the 
searching  light  of  the  Gospel  wouhA  make  manifest  its  unholy 
thoughts  and  aflfections,  just  as  a  ray  of  the  sun,  let  through  the 
chink  of  an  old  ruin,  reveals  the  "unsightly  guests  that  dwell 
within  ?  It  were  well  if  some  of  our  literary  men,  and  jihilosophic 
religionists,  who  cry  out  against  soulless  creeds  and  dogmatic 
Ciu-istianity,  would  "lay  theblamo  at  the  right  quarter,  and  not 
give  a  false  value  to  human  nature,  at  the  expense  of  depreciating 
historical  truth.  He  wh.o  "  saw  with  open  eye  the  mystery  of  the 
soul,"  accounted  for  the  rejection  or  feeble  influence  of  his 
Gospel,  by  saying,  "men  loved  darkness  rather  than  light,  because 
their  deeds  were  evil,"  And  all  history  proves,  what  the  Scripture 
afiiims,  that  the  natural  man  receivetli  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit 
of  God, 


The  river  is  traced  up  to  its  source.     But,  in  order  to  account 


182  SPBCULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

fully  for  its  nisliing  waters,  we  must  notice  the  tributary  streams 
that  it  receives  in  its  passage.  And,  among  the  specific  and  subor- 
dinate canoes  of  iniidelity,  we  are  disposed  to  enumerate  —  Specu- 
lative Pliilosophy,  Social  Disiitfection,  the  CoiTuptions  of  Christi- 
anity, Keligious  Intolerance,  and  the  Disunion  of  the  Church. 
These  we  shall  briefly  notice. 


CHAPTER  II. 

SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

Sppcnlativp  Philosophv  inevitable— Indicates  a  thinkinjf  and  reflective  a^e  — Tn- 
flneiicps  the  religion' of  an  age—  Has  ever  been  tampering  vnth  Chnstian  truth 

—  Gnosticism  in  tlie  primiiive  Church  — Allegoricai  method  of  inteiiDretation 

—  Sacramental  theoi^  —  Platonism  —  Scholasticism  -  Connection_!:flween  Mo- 
dern Speculative  I'hilosophv  and  forms  of  Modern  Infidelity  — The  Sensational 
I'liih.snphv  — Deistical  Writers —  Influence  of  Sensationalism  on  works  of 
pcienre  and  common  literature  —  The  old  Uuitarianism  —  French  Sensa- 
tionalism •  Co  , dillac— School  of  Voltaire  — Protracted  influencesof  Sensation- 
alism—The Ideal  Philo-^ophv  :  Germany—  The  human  mind  made  determinatoi" 
of  r'liL;ions  truth  —  Contempt  for  Evidences  —  Seen  in  Strauss  —  Influence  of 
Idealii=ra  in  our  own  countrv  —  Carlvle  —  Emerson  —  Parker  —  Newman  — 
Mackav  —  Morell  — Importance  of  maintaining  Historical  Christianity  —  Har- 
mony between  a  true  Faith  and  a  true  Philosophy. 

Thf  rise  of  a  speculative  philosophy,  in  any  age  or  country  where 
there  are  thinkers,  seems  inevitable.  It  is  the  natural  consequence 
of  the  mind's  desire  to  penetrate  into  the  mysteries  of  existence, 
and  to  Icnow  all  things.  IMan  himself  is  a  mystery,  the  world 
aroinid  him  is  a  mystery,  the  great  God  above  him  is  a  mystery, 
and  the  relations  between  each  and  all  of  them  are  profoundly  and 
impressively  mysterious.  And,  while  the  great  majority  of  men 
never  attempt  to  lift  up  the  veil,  but  are  content  "with  the  know- 
ledge that  lies  on  the  surface  of  things,  there  are  those  who  must 
end"eavour  to  get  beyond  and  solve  the  problems  of  mysterious 
existence.  Every  country  that  has  emerged  from  barbarism,  and 
attained  to  any  degree  of  mental  cultivation,  is  more  or  less  cha- 
racterized by  philosophical  speculation.  This,  in  itself,  is  not  to  be 
regarded  as  an  evil.  It  indicates  a  thinking  and  reflecting  age, 
and  marks  the  advancement  of  a  community  in  mental  culture. 
The  evil  is,  when  it  spurns  the  investigation  of  palpable  facts  and 
indubitable  evidence,  treats  as  empirical  the  honest  method  of  in- 
duction, and  incautiously  passes  the  bounds  of  all  fair  and  legiti- 
mate inquiry.  Then  it  becomes  intolerant  of  the  world  of  realities, 
is  vainly  ])n'ffed  up,  and.  intruding  into  those  things  which  are  not 
seen,  would,  instead  of  proving  a  handmaid  to  true  leligion,  assume 
the  air  of  an  imperious  mistress,  and  decide  its  shape,  dress,  and 
laws.  To  this  charge,  the  gi-eater  number  of  the  systems  of  phi- 
losophy tliat  have  emanatetVfrom  the  schools  must  plead  guilty. 

Jt  is  vei-y  obvious  that  the  philosophy  of  an  age  must  materially 
influence  the  religion  of  that  age.     The  great  subjects  with  which 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY,  183 

speculative  philosophy  is  conversant,  are  those  which  lie  within 
the  domain  of  natural  and  revealed  truth.  It  cannot  touch  upon 
the  finite  and  the  infinite,  upon  man,  the  universe,  and  God, 
without  coming  into  contact  with  some  of  the  great  essential  prin- 
ciples of  religion.  Its  speculations  upon  man  aflect  his  position 
as  a  fallen  heing,  the  suhject  of  moral  government,  and  an  lieir  of 
immortality.  Its  speculations  upon  the  universe  bear  upon  the 
evidences  of  creative  power,  and  providential  control,  and  the 
existence  of  good  and  evil.  And  its  speculations  upon  God,  the 
Absclute,  as  philosophy  terms  Him,  bear  upon  his  personality, 
independent  existence  and  agency,  and  the  relations  in  wliich  He 
stands  to  the  material  universe  and  the  human  race.  Views  on 
these  great  subjects,  at  particular  periods,  notwithstanding  the 
clear  and  definite  statements  regarding  them  in  the  sacred  volume, 
have  been  very  much  moulded  by  the  reigning  intellectual  philo- 
sophy. And  that  divine  record  itself,  so  firmly  established  in 
history,  and  speaking  in  the  tone  of  heaven's  authority,  lias  been 
made  to  give  forth  its  utterances  according  as  philosophy  dictated 
and  allowed.  The  servant,  usurping  the  place  of  the  master,  has, 
as  commonly  happens,  stripped  the  master  of  every  vestige  of 
authority,  put  words  into  his  mouth,  or  given  the  interpretation, 
and  that  not  unfrequently  a  false  one,  of  all  that  he  said. 

The  history  of  every  age.  from  the  beginning  of  the  Gospel 
until  now,  too  clearly  shows  that  a  speculative  philosophy  has  ever 
been  tampering  with  "  the  law  and  the  testimony,"  corrupting  the 
simplicity,  and  weakening  the  power,  of  Christian  truth  ;  and  been 
a  subordinate  cause  in  producing,  or  aiding,  the  irreligion  and 
scepticism  of  cultivated  minds.  The  Pauline  epistles  testify,  that, 
before  the  apostles  had  left  the  world,  philosophy,  in  some  ef  its 
forms,  was  seeking  to  exert  an  evil  influence  on  the  church ;  so 
that  Paul  needed  to  protest  against  its  intrusion,  and  wai-n  the 
disciples  of  its  spirit.  Christianity,  in  the  primitive  age,  had 
obtained  a  footing  in  many  of  those  cities  where,  on  account  of 
their  proximity  to  Greece,  the  Oriental  and  Grecian  philosophies 
prevailed.  These  philosophies  were  rife  with  bold  and  unhallowed 
speculations  respecting  such  things  as  the  mode  of  the  Divine 
existence,  and  the  nature  of  the  Divine  agency.  The  sublime 
mysteries  of  the  Gospel  were  just  such  subjects  into  which  they 
wished  to  intrude.  And,  from  a  vain  philosophy  —  vain,  because 
transcending  the  boundaries  of  fair  and  legitimate  inquiry  —  the 
simplicity  of  the  faith  had  no  less  to  dread  than  from  the  misap- 
preliensions  and  corruptions  of  Judaism.  Gnosticism  did  in  the 
church,  in  primitive  times,  what  rationalism  has  been  doing  in 
modern  times.  "  In  all  cases,"  says  Neander,  "  the  gnostics  were 
for  explaining  outward  things  from  within  —  that  is,  from  their 
intuitions,  which  were  above  all  doubt."*     Gnosticism  was  the  phi- 

*  Church  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  71.  (Clarke's  edition.) 


13 i  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

lo^iophiogavl)  in  wiiicli  infidelitv,  with  great  professions  of  reverence, 
]ai(l  lis  Imnds  on  tlie  Gospels,  reduced  to  its  own  standard  ths 
revealed  mvsf.eries.  and  disturbed  the  peace  and  purity  of  the  early 
cliurt'li.  This  ]^hilosophy  was  a  fruitful  source  of  scejiticism  and 
irreligion.  and  from  it  s:.em.  in  a  great  measure,  to  have  emanated 
those  deadly  errors  respecting  the  person  and  work  of  Christ  which 
disfigured  and  tore  in  pieces  tlie  fair  form  of  primitive  Christianity. 

The  corrujitions  of  Christianity  pave  the  way  for  the  denial  of 
Christianity  itself.  And  it  has  often  been  remarked,  that  there  is 
scai'cely  a  corruiition  of  religious  truth  which  might  not  be  shown 
to  liave  existed  during  the  first  three  centuries  of  the  Christian  age. 
These  corruptions  are.  in  a  great  measure,  to  be  traced  to  the  pre- 
vailing speculative  philosophies,  abetted  and  being  abetted  by  the 
depraved  tendency  in  man  to  mutilate,  ov  add  to,  deform,  and 
weaken,  the  revelations  of  heaven.  It  is  to  a  philosophical  influ- 
ence, for  the  most  part,  that  we  ascribe  those  unsound  methods  of 
intei'pretation,  which,  in  the  shape  of  allegory  and  mysticism, 
were  carried  so  far  by  Origen  and  others,  and  which  found  hidden 
meanings  in  statements  that  were  perfectly  plain,  and  saw  nothing 
incomprehensible  in  doctrines  the  most  mysterious.  The  Alex- 
andrian school  of  divinity,  beaded  by  Origen,  became  famous  for 
its  union  of  a  spurious  philosophy  with  Christianity.  Some  of  the 
Ciiristian  fathers  em])loyed  the  same  allegorical  method  in  inter- 
jU'eting  the  inspired  record,  that  the  Pagan  Platonists  employed  in 
coimnenting  on  the  popidar  mythology  and  the  Iliad  of  Homer. 
And  this  tended,  very  much,  to  change  Christianity  from  the  pure 
state  in  which  it  had  been  given  to  the  world  by  the  Lord  and  his 
apostles. 

It  is  to  a  philosophical  influence,  in  a  great  degree,  also,  that 
must  be  traced  the  sacrament'-d  theory.  Baptismal  regeneration 
does  not  date  its  birth  in  modern  times.  It  was  held  by  many  of 
the  primitive  fathei's.  We  find  it,  where  we  find  almost  all  the 
corruptions  of  Christianity,  in  the  first  three  centuries ;  and  as  a 
fiTiit  of  a  vain  philosoijhy  tampering  with  t!ie  spirituality  and  sim- 
plicity of  the  church.  It  was  common  to  impute  a  mystic  efficacy 
to  the  use  of  certain  terms,  such  as  the  repetition  of  the  name  of 
Jesus,  and  to  the  practice  of  certain  forms.  This  flowed  fiom  the 
philosophical  notions  about  matter.  Matter  was  alleged  to  have  cer- 
tain evil  tendencies,  while,  co-existing  with  these,  were  some  inherent 
powers  which,  being  controlled  by  the  divine  will,  counteracted 
tlie  evil.  Thiscontrol  was  believed  to  be  associated  with  the  utter- 
ance of  certain  words  and  the  j'lerformance  of  certain  rites.  Hence 
th,i  mystical  and  superstitious  efficacy  of  the  sacraments.-i<  But 
for  the  ])hysical  ])hilo5ophy  ol'  tlie  schools,  and  the  general  belief 
in  magic  in  the  early  ages  of  the  church,  it  may  be  questioned 
if  the   sacramental   theory   would  have  met  with  such  a  reaay 

*  Sec  Yangli.tin"s  Corruptions  of  Christiar.ity,  p.  293,  f>ic. 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPIIT.  IdW 

reception.  These  invested  the  ministers  of  religion  with  tremen- 
dous spiritual  power,  made  them,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  dispensers 
of  the  grace  of  God,  and  originated  that  system  of  sacramental 
efficiency  which,  overshadowing  tlie  pure  gospel,  has  corrupted 
God's  religion  into  man's  religion,  and,  in  thousands  of  cases,  has 
induced  thinking  men  to  reject  both. 

Plato  and  Aristotle  were  the  chiefs  of  the  ancient  schools.  In 
them  may  be  said  to  have  centered  all  the  speculative  philosophy 
of  Greece.  And  the  influence  of  the  one  in  the  Eastern  churches, 
for  several  centui-ies  subsequent  to  the  apostles,  was  manil'ested 
in  debasing  and  changing  the  very  substance  of  revealed  truth ; 
w^hile  the  influence  of  \he  other  in  the  ^^'est.  during  the  middle 
ages,  was  exerted  in  defending  and  strengthening  the  corruptions. 
It  is  not  a  question  with  us,  what  use  these  philosophies  were  in 
whetting  the  human  intellect,  or  how  far  they  jnoved  to  be  "  the 
best  gymnastic  of  the  mind,"  but  what  bearings  had  they  upon 
that  truth  which,  coining  from  above,  is  the  divinest  and  truest 
phjloso])hy.  And  history  w^arrants  the  assertion  that  they  spoiled 
it,  corrupted  its  purity,  innovated  into  its  very  essence,  and  were 
fruitful  sources  of  formalism  and  infidelity. 

It  has  been  well  remarked,  by  Dr.  Hampden,  that  of  the  two 
philosophies,  in  their  bearing  on  religious  opinion,  "  Platonism 
has  been  more  aiTogant  in  its  pretensions:  it  has  aspired,  not  to 
modify,  but  to  supersede  Christian  truth..  Christianity  had  to 
struggle  in  its  infancy  against  the  theology  of  the  school  of  Alex- 
andria, vdiich  regai'ded  the  Chiistian  system  as  an  intrusion  on 
the  philosophical  ascendancy  w^hich  it  had  hitlierto  enjoyed.  The 
Kew-Platonists  disputed  the  originality  of  the  Christian  doctrine, 
asserting  that  the  sayings  of  our  Lord  were  all  derived  from  the 
doctrines  of  their  master.*  Nor  was  the  mischief  from  the 
Alexandrian  school  neutralized,  when,  its  open  hostility  being 
found  ineff*ectual,  disciples  of  that  school  mercfed  themselves  into 
the  Christian  name.  The  accommodation  which  then  took  place 
between  the  theories  of  their  philosophy  and  the  doctrines  of  the 
faith,  proved  a  snare  to  members  of  the  church.  Hence,  upon 
the  whole,  resulted,  even  in  the  beginnings  of  the  Gospel,  an 
ambiguity  respecting  the  peculiar  rights  of  the  antagonist  systems. 
And  this"  ambiguity  aflected  the  question  of  the  self-originated 
divine  character  of  the  Christian  truth." f 

It  deserves  notice  that  Neander  re})resents  Platonism  as  having 
had  a  double  influence  in  relation  to  Christianity.  He,  speaking 
from  his  own  experience,  regards  it  as  having  been,  in  many  cases, 
a  tran.'iition  point  to  the  Gospel.  But  the  question  is,  what  was 
its  influence  when  carried  into  Christianity  itself?      The  illus- 

*  Infirlelity  perfm-ni^   a  cvcIp.    ISiv.  Emer^ou  says— a  tbing  easier  sr.id  tliaa 
prove-l— ■•'  CijriHti;inity  is  in  Plato's  Pliaedo." 
t  JiainiJuen'a  Banjptou  Lectuie,  p.  10. 


ISO  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

tiious  church  historian  himself  shall  answer:  "  the  New  Platonism 
could  not  bring  itself  to  anquiesce,  particularly,  in  that  humility 
of  knowlediie,  aud  that  rc'iiiitaiution  of  self,  which  Christianity 
required.  It  could  not  be  induced  to  sacrifice  its  philosophical, 
aristocratic  notions,  to  a  reiis^ion  which  would  make  the  higher 
life  a  common  possession  for  all  mankind.  The  religious  eclecticism 
of  this  direction  of  the  spirit  could  do  no  otherwise  than  resist 
the  exclusive  aud  sole  supremacy  of  the  religion  that  suffered  no 
other  at  its  side,  but  would  subject  all  to  itself."*  Accordingly, 
as  he  shows,  it  was  from  this  school  that  the  most  numerous  as 
well  as  the  most  formidable  antagonists  of  Cln-istianity  proceeded. 

While  the  i^atouism  of  Ale.\audria  was  thus  gaining  an 
ascendancy  in  the  early  church,  recommending  itself  to  the  ima- 
gination of  tiie  contenijilative  as  the  revealer  of  mysteries,  and 
thus  transnuiting  the  pni-e  gold  of  Christianity  into  an  impure 
mixture,  the  pliilosophy  of  Aristotle  was,  for  the  most  part, 
regarded  with  aversion,  as  the  armour-bearer  of  heretics  and  of 
the  assailants  of  the  faith.  But,  duriiig  the  middle  ages,  the 
Scholastic  Philosophy  had  its  throne  in  the  very  heart  of  the 
Christian  church;  and  its  supremacy  is  still  visible  in  the  Romish 
system — the  most  corrupt  form  of  Christianity  that  has  been 
given  to  the  world.  From  the  seventh  century,  and  onward,  the 
philosophy  of  the  Stagyrite  began  to  he  exclusively  studied; 
and  was  resorted  to  for  weapons,  not  so  much  in  defence  of  scrip- 
tural truth  as  for  tlie  purpose  of  strengthening  and  perpetuating 
the  corruptions  and  superstitions  with  which  the  church  was 
overrun.  "  The  question  of  the  influence  of  Aristotle's  philosophy 
is  more  important  on  this  very  account,  that  it  has  been  more 
subtile,  more  silently  insinuated  into,  and  spread  over,  the  whole 
system  of  Christian  doctrines.  J3eing  employed  as  an  instrument 
of  disputation,  it  has  not  been  confined,  like  Platonism,  to  certain 
leading  points  of  Christianity,  as,  for  instance,  to  the  doctrines  of 
the  Trinity  and  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  but  has  been  applied 
to  the  systematic  development  of  the  sacred  truth  in  all  its  parts." 

"  It  is  the  metaphysics  of  the  schools,  which  form  the  texture 
of  the  Ptoman  theology  and  by  which  that  system  is  maintained. 
In  the  destitution  of  'Scrii)ture-facts  for  the  support  of  the  theolo- 
gical structure,  the  method  of  subtile  distinctions  and  j-easoniugs 
has  been  found  of  admirable  efficacy.  It  eludes  the  opponent, 
who,  not  being  trained  to  this  dialectical  warfare,  is  not  aware, 
that  all  such  ai-gume;itation  is  a  tacit  assumption  of  the  point  in 
controversy;    or  is  perplexed  aud  confounJed  by  the  elaborate 

subtilties  of  the  apologist The  resistance,  which  the 

Roman  church  has  shown  against  improvements  in  Natural 
Philosophy,  is  no  inconsiderable  evidence  of  the  connection  of  the 

*  Neander's  Cliurcli  History,  vol.  i.  pp.  40,  218.    (Clarke's  edition.) 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY.  187 

ecclesiastical  system  with  the  ancient  logical  philosophy  of  the 
schools.  There  has  been  a  constant  fear,  lest,  if  that  philosophy 
should  be  exploded,  some  important  doctrines  could  not  be 
maintained. "-;=: 

This  contentious  philosophy,  existing  in  the  bosom  of  the 
church  for  many  centuries,  ''  clothed  in  the  purple  of  spiritual 
supremacy,  and  giving  the  law  of  faith  to  the  subject-consciences  of 
men,"  was  a  fruitful  source  of  scepticism  and  infidelity.  Not  a  few 
distinguished  names,  including  scholars  of  eminence  and  several 
of  the  popes,  have  been  mentioned  as  instances  in  wliich  doubt 
and  disputation,  taking  the  place  of  the  love  of  truth,  engendered 
a  cold  or  profligate  disbelief.  Mr.  Hallam,  speaking  of  the  un- 
bounded admiration  which  the  schoolmen  had  for  the  wi'itings 
of  Aristotle,  says,  "  With  all  their  apparent  conformity  to  the 
received  creed,  there  was,  as  might  be  expected  from  the  circum- 
stances, a  great  deal  of  real  deviation  from  orthodoxy,  and  even 
of  infidelity.  The  scholastic  mode  of  dispute,  admitting  of  no 
termination,  and  producing  no  conviction,  was  the  sure  cause  of 
sceptism ;  and  the  system  of  Aristotle,  especially  with  the  com- 
mentaries of  Averroes,  bore  an  aspect  very  unfavourable  to  na- 
tural religion  The  Aristotelian  philosophy,  even  in  the  hands  of 
the  master,  was  like  a  barren  tree,  that  conceals  its  want  of  fruit 
by  profusion  of  leaves.  But  the  scholastic  ontology  was  much 
worse. "f  Men,  in  order  to  display  their  ingenuity,  involved  in 
perplexity  the  most  important  truths,  fostered  a  spirit  the  very 
reverse  of  that  with  which  it  becomes  us  to  approach  the  Sacred 
Oracles,  made  the  worse  not  unfrequently  appear  the  better  reason, 
and,  in  some  instances,  went  so  far  as  to  take  up  the  false  and 
destructive  position,  that  opinions  which  were  philosophically 
true  might  be  theologically  false.  What  Milton  says  of  the  iallen 
angels  and  their  speculations,  is  strikingly  descriptive  of  the 
schoolmen  and  the  dialectical  abuses  in  which  they  passionately 
indulged:  — 

"  They  found  no  end,  in  wandering  mazes  lost. 


Vain  wisdom  all,  and  fedse  philosophy." 

And  just  because  the  philosophy  was  false,  and  the  wirxlom  vain, 
the  Christian  faith  encountered  in  it  a  dangerous  enemy  under 
the  disguiss  of  a  professed  friend. 

It  is,  however,  of  the  connection  subsisting  between  the  modern 
speculative  philosophy  and  the  forms  of  modern  infidelity,  that  we 
wish  more  especially  to  speak.  Two  philosophies,  distinguished 
from  each  other  by  very  broad  characteristics,  though,  in  so  far 
as  religion  is  concerned,  often  tending  substantially  to  the  same 
result,  have  played  very  pi-ominent  parts  in  modern  times.     We 

*    Hampden's  Bampton  Lecture,  pp.  12,  385. 
+  Hallam's  Europe  during  the  Middle  Ages,  vol.  iii.  p.  636. 


183  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

allude  to  \vliat  havp.  bsen  aptly  desicfnated  scnsatlonaHsm  and 
idealism.  Tho  influence  of  these  philosophies,  when  puslied  to 
their  extremes,  lias  been  productive  of  a  vast  amount  of  the  in- 
fidelity which,  during;-  the  last  and  the  present  century,  has  pre- 
vailed in  the  departments  of  scriptural  exegesis,  literature,  and 
science. 

Tho  sensational  philosophy  has  liad  a  wide-spread  influence, 
in  niany  quarters,  in  destroying  the  veiy  fundamental  principles 
of  natural  and  revealed  religion.  It  was  in  fact,  iu  one  period, 
the  creed  of  nparly  the  whole  of  philosophical  Kurope.  Hobbes 
is  the  precursor  of  modern  sensationalism.  He.  by  resolving 
every  operation  of  the  mind  into  transformed  sensations,  based 
his  theory  upon  avowed  materialism,  struck  the  root  of  all  religion, 
precluded  us  from  having  any  real  conception  of  a  Supreme  Being, 
and  sliut  us  out  fi*om  all  otliei-  existences  but  matter  and  a  ma- 
terial world.  His  Psychology  is  expressed  in  the  maxim:  nihil 
e.st  in  in'eUectu  quod  iinn  priiis  fiierit  in  sensu.  Nothing,  according 
to  him,  is  in  the  intellect,  but  wliat  was  previously  in  the  sense. 
It  is  chiefly  owing,  however,  to  the  circumstance  of  his  name 
having  become  so  much  associated  with  that  of  Locke,  that  the 
philosopher  of  Malmesbury  has  exerted  such  an  influence  in  tlie 
spread  of  sensationalism.  The  system  of  the  "  Leviathan,"  and 
that  of  the  '•  Essay  on  the  Human  Understanding,"  have  been 
confounded.  And  a  corruption,  or  an  exaggerated  development, 
of  Locke's  principles,  has  been  imputed  to  him  as  if  he  were  its 
veritable  author.  But  the  difference  between  them  is  funda- 
mental. The  sensationalism  of  Locke  has  no  necessary  tendency 
to  materialism,  whereas  materialism  is  not  only  the  landing-])lace, 
but  the  foundation  of  the  theory  of  Hobbes.  "  They  difl^er,"  says 
Sii- James  Mackintosh,  "  not  only  in  all  their  premises,  and  many 
of  their  conclusions,  hut  in  their  manner  of  philosophizing  itself. 
Locke  had  no  prejudice  which  could  lead  him  to  imbibe  doctrines 
from  the  enemy  of  lihei'ty  and  of  religion"  The  province  wiiich 
Locke  assigns  to  reflection,  and  his  maintaining  that  the  senses 
do  not  furnish  the  intellect  with  the  whole  of  its  ideas,  clear  him 
of  the  charge  of  a  tendency  to  materialism.  How,  then,  has  his 
name  become  allied  with  the  jiernicious  dogmas  of  the  materialist 
scliool  that  flourished  in  the  eighteenth  century;  and  how  comes 
M.  Cousin  to  say,  that  "  since  the  metaphysic  of  Locke  crossed 
the  channel,  on  the  light  and  brilliant  wings  of  Voltaire's  imagin- 
ation, sansualism  has  reigned  in  France  without  contradiction, 
and  with  an  authority  of  which  there  is  no  parallel  iu  the  whole 
history  of  philosophy?"  'i'he  explanation  is  to  be  found  in  what 
Sir  W.  Hamilton  calls  "  tlio  two  pai-tial  princii)les''  of  Locke, 
which  the  French  school.  re])resentpd  by  Cond iliac  and  Cabanis, 
much  exaggerated.  The  sensuous  origin  of  our  knowledge,  though 
not  to  the  exclusion  of  reflection,  has  a  very  prominent  place  as- 


SPECULATIVE    I'll  ILOSOI-IIY.  189 

sipfned  to  it  in  tlie  "  Essay  on  tlie  Hnmau  Understanding;"  and 
it  is  this  ])art  of  Irs  syst.eui  tlia^.  the  sensational  school  has  drawn 
out,  and  founded  tliereou  a  scheme  of  niaierialism  destructive  of 
ail  the  prineijiles  ofnioraliiy  and  religion. 

It  has  been  said,  "that  Locke  distinctly  enough  foresaw  the 
idealistic  and  sceptical  arguments  which  might  he  drawn  frou)  his 
principles.  He  did  not  draw  them,  because  he  thought  iheni 
frivolous."  But  others  did.  In  our  own  country  Berkeley  de- 
rived from  them  his  arguments  against  the  e.\.istence  of  matter 
and  a  material  world;  and  David  Hume,  taking  a  bold  step  ia 
advance,  involved  both  mind  and  matter  in  doubt  and  darkness. 
Berkeley  laid  hold  on  Locke's  principle,  tlr-t  oiir  knowledge  of 
extei-nai  things  is  not  immediate  but  through  the  intervention  of 
ideas,  and  maintained  that  matter  is  not  a  reality  but  an  infer- 
ence; that  "  all  the  choir  of  heaven  and  fra-niture  of  earth  —  all 
those  bodies  which  compose  the  mighty  frame  of  the  world  — 
have  not  any  subsistence  without  a  mind."  Hume,  too  acute  not 
to  see  the  inference,  and  too  sceptical  not  to  diaw  it,  showed  that 
the  existence  of  mind  as  well  as  matter  was  a  more  inference,  and 
that  nothing  real  was  left  us  but  a  succession  of  nnpressions  and 
ideas.  These  speculations  were,  in  the  last  degree,  adverse  to  the 
interests  of  religion. 

Philosophical  scepticism,  within  certain  limits,  does  not  neces- 
sarily imply  religious  scepticism.  But  in  the  case  of  Hume  it 
was  universal  —  involving  in  inextricable  doubt  and  confusion 
the  whole  region  of  morals  and  religion.  And  its  etiect  on  multi- 
tudes who  had  neither  the  inclination,  nor  ability,  to  follow  the 
philosopher  through  all  his  subtile  windings,  was  seen  in  a  con- 
temptuous disregard  of  everything  lying  beyond  the  senses  as 
wrapped  up  in  the  most  ])erplexing  doubt  and  mystery.  It  is 
indisputable  that  the  stu])id  deistical  school  of  writers  which 
flourished  during  the  last  century,  a  school  into  wiiich  Locke 
never  would  have  entered,  fortilied  themselves  with  many  of  the 
conclusions  that  were  drawn  from  exaggeratiiig  the  somewhat 
partial  principles  of  his  philosophy.  It  was  on  these  conclusions 
that  they  endeavoured  to  ground  their  doctrines  of  invincible 
necessity,  and  stern  materialism,  theieby  tending  to  confound 
moral  distinctions,  and  to  make  God  and  nature  synonymous. 
And  it  is  just  as  indis])utable  that  through  them  descended  to  the 
educated  classes  in  general,  the  disposition  to  look  with  indiffer- 
ence on  everything  supernatural,  so  fearfully  cliaract^^ristic  of  the 
period  referred  to.  The  Israelites  heard  conflicting  accoiuUs  of 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  being  disposed  to  believe  the  evil  report 
which  suited  their  indolence  and  carnality,  they  said,  *'  Let  tis 
make  a  captain,  and  let  us  return  into  Egyi)t."  And  multitudes 
who  are  more  prone  to  cleave  to  earth  than  rise  to  heaven,  seeing 
in  the  progress  of  philosophic  speciUatiou  the  tendency  to  mate- 


190  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

rialise  everything,  or  to  wrap  in  perplexity  tlie  supersensual,  are 
disposed  to  leave  religion  to  priests,  and  \artually  say,  "  Let  us 
eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrov/  we  die." 

In  many  of  our  works  of  science,  and  in  much  of  our  common 
literature,  the  evil  influence  of  an  extreme  sensationalism  has 
been  manifested.  Secondary  causes  are  rested  in,  while  an  intel 
ligent  First  Cause  is  seldom  or  never  adverted  to.  Providence  is 
either  denied,  thrust  away  into  a  general  superintendence,  or 
habitually  passed  over  as  a  worn-out  fiction.  And  nature  is 
brought  in  to  control  and  account  for  everything,  as  if,  indepen- 
dent of  nature,  there  were  no  God.  Priestley  has  been  instanced 
as  an  example  of  the  influence  of  a  sensational  philosophy  on 
religious  opinions.  He  Avas  an  avowed  materialist ;  and,  though 
he  did  not  carry  his  materialism  so  far  as  to  overturn  the  prin- 
ciples of  natural  religion,  his  theology  was  unstable  as  water, 
liaving  little  or  nothing  in  it  peculiarly  Christian,  and  being 
powerless  for  the  promotion  of  spiritual  life.  Tliis  influence  has 
been  felt,  and  acknowledged,  on  the  Unitarianism  which,  since 
his  time,  has  existed  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic ;  for  it  is  unde- 
niable that  it  has  been  losing  whatever  spirituality  it  possessed, 
and  been  gravitating  more  and  more  towards  simple  Deism. 
There  exist  an  "  Old  School"  and  a  "New  School,"  as  they  are 
called ;  and  while  the  latter  is,  in  a  great  measure,  the  effect  of 
German  idealism,  the  former  represents  the  influence  of  the  old 
sensationalism.  "It  is  connected,"  says  Mr.  Theodore  Parker, 
"  with  a  philosophy  poor  and  sensual,  the  same  in  its  basis  with 
that  which  gave  birth  to  the  seliish  system  of  Paley,  the  scepti- 
cism of  Hume,  the  materialism  of  Hobbes,  the  denial  of  the 
French  deists."-'.'^  This,  though  the  testimony  of  one  who  has 
passed  over  to  the  "  Scbool  of  Progress,"  is  true.  In  short,  the 
influence  of  a  developed  sensational  i^hilosophy,  when  brought  to 
bear  on  religion,  has  ever  been  to  denude  it  of  its  mysteries, 
quench  its  si)irit,  reduce  it  to  a  system  of  material  formalism,  if 
not  to  deny  it  both  in  substance  and  name.  Mr.  Morell  thus 
briefly  marks  the  progressive  stages :  "  The  first  effect  is  to 
weaken  our  perception  of  the  Divine  personality;  this,  in  the 
second  place,  makes  itself  apparent  by  overturning  the  doctrine 
of  a  particular  providence;  next,  in  order  to  remove  the  Divine 
woi-king  further  away  from  the  world,  secondary  causes  are 
adduced  to  explain,  not  only  all  the  phenomena  of  nature,  but 
also  the  direction  of  human  life;  and  then,  lastly,  the  process 
advancing  one  step  further,  it  begins  to  be  an  object  of  specula- 
tion and  of  doubt  wliether  there  be  a  distinct  personality  in  the 
Deity  or  not;  until,  at  length,  the  conception  of  God  is  entirely 
blended  with  that  of  the  order  and  unity  of  natui-e."f 

*  Parlter's  Discourse,  p.  355. 
+  Morell's  History  of  Philosophy,  vol.  ii.  p.  584. 


SPECULATIVE  PHILOSOPHY.  191 

It  is  to  the  Continent,  however,  and  especially  to  France,  that 
we  must  look  for  the  full  and  b)'oad  efieets  of  an  extreme  sensa- 
tional philosophy.  Condillac  was  the  great  apostle  of  the  sensual 
philosophy  of  the  Continent.  He  tiomished  about  the  same  time  as 
Hume,  but  his  influence  was  much  greater.  A  professed  disciple 
of  Locke,  wliose  essay  on  the  "  Human  Understanding"  was  warndy 
received  in  France,  he,  in  the  course  of  his  speculations,  dejiarted 
widely  from  him.  The  English  philosopher,  while  laying  great 
stress  on  the  sensuous  origin  of  our  knowledge,  recognised  two 
sources — sense  and  reflection.  The  French  metapliysu^ian  obli 
terated  the  distinction,  and  resolved  reflection  and  aii  our  mental 
processes  into  sensation.  As  a  philosophy  of  sensationalism,  that 
of  Condillac  was  complete;  and  it  \^ould  have  roused  the  indig- 
nation of  the  illustrious  Englishman,  could  he  have  heard  his 
name  associated  with  it,  as  has  often  been  done  on  the  Continent, 
"In  truth,"  as  Mr.  Lewes  remarks,  "  when  you  see  Locke's  name 
mentioned  by  the  French  writers  of  the  eighteenth  century,  you 
may  generally  read  Hobbes;  for  they  had  retrogiaded  to  Hobbes, 
imagining  they  had  developed  Locke. "-f-  Tlie  results  which  fol- 
lowed, in  reference  to  religion,  were  feaiful.  'I'he  amiable  philo- 
sopher, spending  his  time  noiselessly  in  his  study,  was  sending 
forth  speculations,  involving  geims  which  aiterwards  rij)ened  into 
absolute  atheism  and  social  convulsions.  A  host  of  po])ular  writers 
arose  who,  pushing  his  philosophy  to  the  utmost  extreme,  Ibunded 
upon  it  an  ethical  system  of  the  most  undisguised  selfishness,  and 
which  substituted  physical,  educational,  and  ])olitical  improvement, 
for  the  duties  and  sanctions  of  religion.  France,  at  tliis  period, 
was  renowned  for  her  brilliant  writers,  her  literary  society,  and 
men  of  scientific  research.  But  within  these  circles,  everything 
spiritual  was  paralyzed  under  the  reigning  influence  of  sensation- 
alism; and  an  infidelity,  sensual,  flippant,  and  daringly  iiti})ious, 
ran  riot  and  prevailed.  Scientific  reseaich  was  sternly  restricted 
to  the  material  objects  and  mechanical  forces  of  nature;  and,  if 
the  philosopher  looked  beyond  tliese,  it  was  up  to  a  vacant  heaven 
in  which,  he  complacently  said,  there  is  no  (Jod.  The  moralist 
viewed  man  as  a  being  wholly  material,  all  whose  mental  powers 
and  processes  were  but  manifested  sensations,  whose  moral  law 
was  self-interest,  and  to  whom  the  doctrines  of  ies})onsibility,  a 
future  life,  and  a  living  Personal  God,  were  tlie  dreains,  ])leasing 
or  perplexing,  of  an  unj)hi]osophic  age.  The  schoo.l  of  Voltaire, 
which  completed  its  cycle  of  impieties  by  ridding  men's  minds  of 
the  idea  of  God — uttering,  as  its  watch-word,  in  reference  to  the 
Saviour  of  the  world,  "  Crush  the  wretcl.'  ;"  proclaiming  death  to 
be  an  eternal  sleep,  and  the  present  sc,  le  the  whole  of  man  — 
was  just  an   embodiment    of   the   irreliyious   influences    of  the 

*  Lewes's  Biogi-apliical  Hiotory  of  rhilosopby,  vol.  iv.  p.  59. 


1<^^  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY. 

reigning  philosophy.  Diderot  and  others  of  the  Encyclojiaedists 
were  pupils  and  admirers  of  Condillac.  And  the  famous  athe- 
istical hook,  "  Systeme  de  la  Natiu-e,"  a  work  of  which  Lord 
Brougham  savs,  ''that  words  sldlfully  substituted  for  ideas,  and 
assumptions  for  proofs,  are  made  to  "pass  current,  not  only  for 
arguments  against  existing  beliefs,  but  for  a  new  system  planted 
intheir  stead,"-  was  the  matured  fruit  of  the  French  sensational 
philosophy.  And  what  was  the  influence  of  that  philosophy  on 
the  people  at  large  ?  They  might  never  have  sat  at  tlie  feet  of  Con- 
dillac, or  of  any  of  the  chiefs  of  the  metaphysical  schools,  but,  as  has 
been  remarked,  "  they  had  no  difficulty  in  laying  hold  of  what  we 
may  term  the  formulas  of  that  philosoi^hy  — formulas  which  came 
before  them  in  very  intelligible  propositions,  declarative  of  complete 
materialism,  together  with  an  implied  denial  both  of  the  doctrine 
of  man's  immortality,  and  the  existence  of  a  God."f  The  inmost 
spirit  o!"  that  philosopliy  was  atheistical,  and  it  was  expiessed  in 
that  bold  course  of  anarchy  and  impiety  which  has  been  too  well 
designated  the  reign  of  terror. 

The  extreme  scepticism  of  Hume,  and  the  old  French  atheistical 
philosophy,  may  receive  little  or  no  coimtenance  in  this  age  of  re- 
viving earnestness,  but  we  have  inherited  sometliing  of  their 
spirit.  Reid  in  Scotland,  and  Kant  on  the  Continent,  may  have 
been  instrumental  in  rolling  back  the  tide,  but  the  destrtictive 
eflects  of  it  are  yet  visible  on  the  land.  That  positive  hostility  to 
a  pure  spiritual  religion,  or  that  contemptuous  disregard  of  it,  so 
Avofully  characteristic  of  some  modern  woi'ks  of  science;  that 
strict  care  to  guard  metapliysical  speculations  and  physical  re- 
searches from  the  idea  of  a  superintending  providence ;  that 
exclusive  attention  to  mere  secondary  causes,  to  the  extrusion  of 
the  great  First  Cause ;  that  cold  formal  air  of  respect  shown  by 
much  of  our  literature  to  rehgious  truth,  and  the  manifest  tendency 
to  look  with  indifference  on  all  religions  as  very  much  alike  ;— 
the  materialism,  indifferentism,  and  formalism  of  the  age,  are  the 
protracted  influences  of  a  waning  sensationalism  acting  on  tlie 
minds  of  men  that  are  prone  to  live  without  God  in  the  world. 

The  influence  of  an  extreme  Ideal  PhilosopJiy,  in  producing 
religious  scepticism,  has  been  not  less  powe'-ful  than  an  extreme 
sensationalism.  The  former  having  a  tendency  to  run  into  pan- 
theism, as  the  latter  to  run  into  materialism  and  atheism.  Wo 
look  to  France,  at  the  end  of  last  century,  for  the  full  development 
of  the  one;  and  to  Germany,  in  more  recent  times,  for  tlie  full  de- 
velopment of  the  other  The  speculative  philosopliy  of  Germany 
ditters  widely  from  that  of  our  own  country ;  and,  as  the  nnnd  of 
a  nation  is  very  much  reflected  in  its  i)hilosophy,  this  ditferenco 
aiises  out  of  the  uifterent  mental  habitudes  of  the  two  peoples. 

♦  Bi-onpbam's  Introfhictnry  Discourse,  p.  172. 
+  Morells  Histoi?  of  Philosophy,  vol.  i.  p.  22. 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY.  193 

The  English  mind  is  einineutly  practical,  and  deals  with  palpable 
facts  ;  it  respects  moral  evidence,  experience,  and  testimony  ;  and 
from  these  makes  its  way  to  tlie  higher  regions  of  abstract  truth. 
Hence  the  clear  common  sense  of  our  philosophy,  and  the  absence 
of  a  vague  transcendentalism  in  our  theology.  The  German  mind, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  imaginative  and  fond  of  speculation,  intole- 
rant of  the  evidence  of  palpable  realities,  and,  from  abstract  con- 
ceptions, argues  its  way  to  a  system  of  science.  Hence  the 
extreme  idealism  of  its  philosophy,  and  the  vague  subtile  specu- 
lations winch,  with  much  that  is  precious,  float  in  its  theology. 
Our  pliilosopliy  aims  chiefly  at  analyzing  the  powers  and  faculties 
of  the  human  mind,  and  thus  reaches  man's  moral  and  intellectual 
nature;  and  tliere  finds,  as  in  the  phenomena  of  the  material 
imiverse,  evidences  of  the  existence,  providence,  and  character  of 
God.  The  German  philosophy,  on  the  contrary,  busies  itself  with 
tliose  great  problems  of  existence  which  were  discussed  again  and 
again  in  the  ancient  schools,  and  attempts  to  solve  the  questions 
relating  to  the  being  and  nature  of  God,  the  universe,  and  the 
moral  agency  of  man.  Philosophy,  in  our  country,  is  not  sucli  an 
engrossing  and  exclusive  object  of  pursuit,  and  consequently  does 
not  exert  such  an  influence  on  oiu"  religious  beliefs.  There  might 
be  a  false  philosophy  in  our  colleges,  and  yet  a  true  theology  might 
retain  a  strong  hold  on  the  hearts  of  our  people.  But,  in  Germany, 
pliilosopliy  occupies  a  large  place,  and  sways  powerfully  the  minds 
of  the  learned,  and  so  close  in  hand  does  it  go  with  theology,  that, 
the  two  have  almost  become  identified.  The  idealism  which  cha- 
racterizes its  meta]3hysical  disquisitions,  characterizes  also  its 
religious  speculations. 

The  German  Ideal  Philosophy  dates  from  the  time  of  Leibnitz. 
He  was  an  opponent  of  Locke,  and  an  independent,  not  a  slavish 
disciple,  of  Descartes.  "  The  comprehensive  and  original  genius 
of  Leibnitz,"  remarks  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  "  itself  the  ideal  abstract 
of  the  Teutonic  character,  had  reacted  powerfully  on  the  minds  of 
his  countrymen ;  and  Bationalism,  (more  properly  Intellectualisni,) 
has,  from  his  time,  always  remained  the  favourite  philosophy  of 
the  Germans.  On  the  principle  of  this  doctrine,  it  is  in  Pteason 
alone  that  truth  and  reality  are  to  be  found. "--i-  Leibnitz  placed 
himself  in  antagonism  to  Locke,  by  maintaining  the  Platonic 
dogma  that  the  soul  originally  contains  the  princi^Dles  of  several 
notions  and  doctrines  which  experience  affords  only  the  occasions 
of  awakening.  And  it  is  in  this  view  of  the  mind  j^ossessing 
innate  ideas,  independent  of  experience,  and  by  its  necessary  laws 
arriving  at  necessary  truths,  that  we  have  the  germs  of  that  philo- 
sophical rationalism  which,  when  fully  developed,  bore  such  bitter 
fruits  in  theology;  just  as  in  the  sensationalist  principle  of  found- 

*  Discussions  ou  riiilosopliy  aud  Literature,  p.  4. 

O 


19-1  SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOniY. 

ing  all  our  knowledge  on  experience,  we  have  tlie  seed  that  ripened 
into  the  complete  scepticism  of  Hume,  and  furnished  food  to  the 
atheistical  school  of  France.     The  one,  attaching  an  exclusive  im- 
5)ortauce  to  everything  within  man,  led  the  way  to  the  finding  of 
uli  knowledge  and  life  in  the  depths  of  the  mind ;  as  the  other, 
attaching  itself  to  what  lay  without,  was  the  occasion  of  sinking 
.the  spiritual  in  the  material.   The  philosophic  thoughts  of  Leibnitz 
"boated  loosely  and  beautifully  on  the  stream ;  Wolf,  one  of  his 
professed  disciples,  gathered  them  np  and  formed  them  into  a  rigid 
system.     With  him  may  be  said  to  have  begun  the  modern  method 
cf  oaiTying  philosophy  into  the  domain  of  religion,  of  applying 
methods  of  proof  to  the  Christian  doctrines  which  are  applicable  only 
to  objects  of  human  science,  and  of  arraigning,  before  a  stern 
logic,  divine  i-evelation  and  historical  testimony.     Tn  the  wake  of 
'.this  school  of  philosophy,  arose  the  great  chief,  Immanuel  Kant, 
"who  greatly  modified  it.     He  was  a  man  of  strong  subjective  ten- 
idencies      It  is  a  primary  principle  of  his  philosophy  that  the 
element  of  oiir  knowledge  coming  from  without,  is  merely  phe- 
nomenal,— having  no  reality  or  shape  till  it  is  subjected  to  the 
laws  of  the  understanding.     The  metaphysicians  of  this  school, 
•says  Dr.  Chalmers,  will  tell  us,  "  that  no  evidence  for  a  God  is  to 
be  found  in  the  experimental  argument  afforded  by  external  and 
visible  nature,  not  at  least  till  the  glorious  spectacle  of  nature, 
;  teeming  to  common  eyes  with  all  the  indices  of  design  and  order, 
•shall  somehow  have  been  transformed  and  sublimated  into  their 
own  speculations."     Kant  led  his  followers  to  a  dizzy  height  far  up 
ill  the  regions  of  air,  but  there  they  did  not  stop.     The  climax 
"was  reached  by  Hegel,  in  whom  idealism  has  become  absolute, 
and  from  him  have  been  obtained  those  weapons  which,  in  the  de- 
l)ai-tment  of  theology,  have  been  wielded  on  the  side  of  a  complete 
-i.*ationalism- 

Now,  one  thing  is  especially  observable,  amid  all  the  bewildering 
.and  shifting  speculations  of  the  modern  German  school,  namely, 
;that  the  human  mind  is  made  the  determinator  of  religious  truth, 
.and  that  no  weight  is  given  to  the  external  facts  and  evidences  of 
revelation  except  in  so  far  as  they  harmonize  with  the  inward 
•-sentiments  and  conceptions.  The  religious  creed  of  our  idealists 
is  not  historical,  a  matter  derived  from  the  past,  a  light  coming 
'from  without;  but  it  is  metaphysical  and  personal,  wrought  out 
'Of  the  human  consciousness,  and  altogether  independent  of  out- 
•^vard  testimony.  It  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  extreme  transcendental 
^)hilosophy,  to  begin  with  the  general  and  abstract  notion  of  being; 
and,  by  a  dialectic  process,  to  construct  a  universe,  a  God,  and  a 
xeligion.  Accordingly,  the  transcendentalist  treats  alike  contemp- 
tuously our  writers  on  the  evidences  of  natural  and  revealed  religion, 
and  our  experimental  philosophers  —  a  Bacon,  a  Newton,  and  a 
HerschelL      The  whole  ahiective  element  of  Christianity,  as  a 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY,  195 

religion  of  liistoiical  facts,  has  no  place  in  Hegelianism,  Its 
place  is  usurped  by  the  a  priori  conceptions  of  the  human  mind. 
Hegel,  as  Ave  have  seen,  has  a  Christology,  but  it  is  the  creation  of 
his  own  philosophy.  He  deduces,  by  a  process  of  logical  argu- 
mentation, a  God  and  the  essential  doctrines  of  evangelism;  bat, 
with  him.  God  lias  no  personality,  except  in  the  human  conscious- 
ness; and  the  evangelic  doctrines  are  not  historical,  inspired  facts, 
but  are  included  in  the  sweep  of  a  philosophical  rationalism. 

The  matured  influence  of  this  philosophy,  in  the  department  of 
tlieology,  is  seen  in  the  writings  of  Strauss.  He  is  an  avowed 
representative  of  the  extreme  Hegelian  party,  and  the  Lehen  Jesu 
is  the  fruit  of  absolute  idealism.  His  attack  on  the  genuineness  of 
the  Gospels,  his  denial  of  an  historical  truth  to  the  New  Testament, 
and  his  attempt  to  resolve  ail  its  wondrous  and  well-authenticated 
facts  into  mythological  representations  of  great  spiritual  ideas,  have 
proceeded  irom  his  philosophical  principles.  The  fundamental 
idea  of  the  school  is,  that  rehgious  truth  is  the  development  of 
men's  thoughts  and  intuitions,  and  not  a  revelation  from  without, 
having  a  firm  footing  in  well-attested  history.  Accordingly,  the 
doctrines  of  the  fall,  the  Trinity,  the  incarnation,  and  the  atonement, 
are  held  not  to  be  historically  true,  but  to  have  been  framed  by  a 
developing  process  of  the  mind.  The  Christ  of  the  Gospels,  Strauss 
declares,  is  not  an  individual,  but  an  idea.  It  is  in  vain  that  you 
point  such  a  man  to  that  vast  and  clear  amount  of  evidence  for 
Christianity  as  a  religion  of  facts  and  a  revelation  from  Heaven, 
derived  from  unquestionable  historic  testimony,  from  a  keen, 
searching  criticism,  from  a  wide  experience,  and  from  the  character 
of  Christ, —  a  character  unrivalled  in  the  annals  of  the  world  for 
the  perfect  harmony  of  its  intellectual  and  moral  elements.  He 
tells  you  that  the  question,  with  him  and  his  school,  is  one,  not  of 
biblical  interpretation  or  historical  testimony,  but  of  philosophical 
possibility.  "  First  principles,"  he  says,  "  must  be  settled  on  phi- 
losophical and  dogmatic  grounds,  before  the  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures  can  take  effect."*  A  first  principle,  with  him,  is,  the 
impossibility  of  mu-acles :  and  that  arises  naturally  out  of  his 
philosophical  creed.  His  philoso])hy  allows  not  the  interposal  of  a 
living  personal  God  in  the  government  of  the  world,  or  in  efiectiug 
the  redemption  of  men.  The  chain  of  endless  causation,  it  says, 
can  never  be  broken.  All  things,  both  in  the  physical  and  moral 
worlds,  fall  under  the  same  law  of  necessary  development ;  and, 
in  harmony  with  this  principle,  Christianity  must  be  explained. 

Isaac  Taylor  has  somewhere  said,  that  es'ery  particle  of  the 
German  infidelity  disappears,  when  once  it  is  proved  that  Jesus 
rose  from  the  dead.  13 ut  the  idealist,  entrenched  behind  his  spe- 
culative philosophy,  is  proof  against  this  evidence.     He  does  what 

*  See  Strauss,  Hegel,  a-ud  their  Opinions.    13y  Dr.  Beai-d. 

o  2 


196  SPECULATIVE    rHILOSOPlIY. 

tlie  French  infidels  did  in  another  way,  supersedes  the  question  of 
historical  testimony,  by  raising  abstract  questions.  We  may  sj^eak 
of  the  folly  of  this  principle,  and  show  how,  if  applied  to  instory 
in  general,  it  would  nullify  its  facts,  and  reduce  its  marvels  to 
mere  mental  conceptions.  But  the  rationalist,  armed  with  his 
Hegelian  weapons,  replies,  Such  is  my  philosophy,  and  my  philo- 
sophy is  my  theology.  And  that  theology,  as  Germany  too  j>lainly 
testifies,  has  left  the  world  without  a  personal  God,  and  man  with- 
out moral  freedom  and  immortality.  "  A  life  beyond  the  grave," 
says  Strauss,  "  is  the  last  enemy  which  speculative  criticism  has 
to*^  oppose,  and,  if  possible,  to  vanquish."  "  Ask  the  extreme 
idealists  of  the  present  day,"  remarks  Mr.  Morell,  "  and  they  will 
tell  you  that  God  is  one  Avith  the  universe  itself.  The  glorious 
conception  of  the  great  Jehovah,  which  we  derive  from  the  display 
of  his  wisdom,  power,  and  love,  in  the  creation  without,  the  con- 
stitution of  our  minds  within,  and  the  intuition  of  our  rational 
and  moral  nature,  soon  sinks  down  into  a  vague  personification  of 
the  human  consciousness.  The  final  result  of  such  a  theology  is, 
that  the  divine  is  dragged  down  to  a  level  with  the  human,  instead 
of  the  human  being  raised  up  (as  it  is  by  Christianity)  to  the 
divine.  Tims,  then,  the  extremes  of  sensationalism  and  idealism 
at  length  meet.  The  one  says  that  God  is  the  universe,  the  other 
that  the  universe  is  God.  Diderot  and  Strauss  can  here  shake 
hands,  and  alike  rejoice  in  the  impious  purpose  of  sinking  the 
personality  of  the  lieity  into  an  abstraction,  which  the  holy  can- 
not love,  and  which  the  wicked  need  not  fear.  Such  is  the  extreme 
of  idealism  in  its  influence  upon  Christian  theology,  an  extreme 
which  contravenes  and  destroys  all  the  good  which  at  first  it  pro- 
mised to  efiect."=;= 

The  influence  of  these  idealistic  speculations  is  telling,  in  some 
quarters,  on  the  religious  literature  of  our  own  country.  Amid 
much  really  valuable  in  the  department  of  theology,  wliich  wo 
have  hnported  from  Germany,  has  come  the  evil  genius  of  its 
philoso]ihic  spirit.  The  writings  of  Coleridge,  Carlyle,  and  others, 
Avho  have  drunk  deep  at  the  German  originals,  have  done  much 
to  diffuse  among  us  the  German  philosophy.  And  though  idealism 
in  its  extreme  manifestations,  has  made  but  little  impression  on 
the  sturdy  and  sound  English  intellect,  yet  we  have  not  wholly 
escaped  the  infection ;  and,  judging  from  some  recent  productions 
of  the  press,  are  not  likely  to  get  rid  of  it  very  soon.  A  want  of 
real  vitality  and  earnestness  in  our  religious  comniimity,  (to  the 
ungrateful  overlooking,  we  think,  of  the  vast  amount  of  living 
godliness  among  us,)  has  been  felt,  and  proclaimed  to  be  the  great 
want  of  the  age.  This  has  been  ascribed,  hi  a  great  degree,  by 
some,  to  the  want  of  a  spiritual  philosophy  in  our  schools      And, 

*  Morell's  History  of  rbilosopLy,  vol.  ii.  p.  G!l, 


SPECULATIVE    PHILOSOPHY.  197 

in  Older  to  suj^ply  this  want,  and  infuse  new  life  into  our 
cold  orthodoxy,  certain  of  om-  writers  would  bring  a  portion  of 
German  idealism  to  Lreathe  upon  our  prostrate  lifeless  creeds, 
shake  them,  make  them  stand  up  and  live.  Accordingly,  a  j-eli- 
gious  philosophy,  or  a  philosophical  religion,  has,  for  some  time 
back,  been  quietly  makhig  its  way  among  us ;  and  we  arc  only 
now  becoming  awake  to  the  mischievous  influence  it  is  likely  to 
have  on  an  liistorical  Christianity. 

Carlyle  and  the  men  of  his  school  seem  to  have  a  greater  love 
for  earnestness  than  for  plain  Gospel  truths.  They  are  disposed 
to  follow  the  philosophers  of  Germany  in  making  religion  a 
creation  from  within, — not  a  matter  received  from  without ;  and 
to  be  in  danger  of  including  among  the  shams  they  cry  out 
against,  the  experimental  and  historical  evidences  of  Christianity. 
Emerson,  after  the  German  fashion,  and  doubtless  owing  to 
German  influence,  finds  everything  within  man,  and  makes  reli- 
gion merely  an  effect  of  mental  action.  "We  run,"  says  he,  "  all 
our  vessels  into  one  mould.  Our  colossal  theologies  of  Judaism, 
€hristism,  Buddhism,  Mahometism,  are  the  necessary  and  structural 
action  of  the  human  mind."*  Of  course,  as  man  has  the  fountain 
of  all  good  in  himself,  his  mind  is  the  determinator  of  what  is 
true  in  every  thing  that  comes  to  liim  from  without.  Theodore 
Parker,  who  has  been  so  well  taught  by  Strauss  and  De  Wette, 
would  have  men  to  use  the  Bible  as  they  use  a  well-filled  table, — 
take  what  suits  their  palate.  Francis  William  Newman,  who  has 
sat  at  the  feet  of  the  same  teachers,  has  come  to  look  upon  the 
study  of  the  Bible  and  its  evidences  "  as  the  greatest  religious 
evil  "of  England;"!  and  he  "  deliberately,  before  God  and  man, 
protests  against  the  attempt  to  make  it  a  law  to  men's  understand- 
ing, conscience,  or  soul."|  Mr.  Mackay,in  his  recent  contribution 
to  our  rationalistic  theology, — "  The  Progress  of  the  Intellect," — 
has  taken,  from  the  German  metaphysical  speculations,  the  deve- 
lopment theory ;  and,  with  little  regard  to  scriptural  statements, 
and  with  an  unfair  use  of  historical  testimony,  has  applied  it  so 
as  to  account  for  the  religion  of  the  Bible,  without  leaving  any 
authority  to  the  Bible  itself.  It  is  with  much  reluctance,  we  add, 
that  Mr.'  Morell,  who,  in  his  first  valuable  work,  pointed  out  and 
denounced  the  influences  of  an  extreme  idealism,  has,  notwith- 
standing the  friendly  warning  of  Dr.  Chalmers,  since  shown  a 
strong  tendency  to  construct,  somewhat  after  the  German  mode, 
a  religion  from  within,  and  to  attach  comparatively  little  impor- 
tance to  that  which  comes  independently  from  without.  _  It  is  but 
iustice  to  say,  as  we  have  formerly  said,  that  there  is  a  wide 
difference  between    the   spirit  of   Mr.  Morell  and  some  of  the 

*  Emerson's  "Representative  Men,  p.  2.  +  Phases  of  Faith,  p.  205. 

i  Tiio  Soul;  her  Sorrows  and  Aspirations,  p.  19'J. 


198  SPECULATIVE    rHlLOSOFHY 

rationalistic  writers  adverted  to.  !!<:?  is  by  no  means  eager,  we  are 
persuaded,  however  bis  principles  may  tend  in  tbat  direction,  to 
subvert  the  great  Christian  truths.  Nevertheless,  Ins  "  Philosophy 
of  Religion"  is  the  product  of  the  German  religious  philosophy. 
And,  in  contending  "most  earnestly  for  this  position — that  the 
simplicity  of  the  gospel  of  Christ  is  to  be  looked  for,  not  in  our 
logical  systems  of  doctrine,  but  in  the  clear  elimination  from  all 
systems,  or  rather  from  the  religious  intaitions  of  all  good  men,  of 
tiie  vital  and  essential  elements  of  Christian  faith  and  love,  hope 
and  joy,"*  —  he  shows  his  strong  subjectivity,  and  a  tendency  to 
number  among  logical  forms  what  the  Christian  world  has  ever 
regarded  as  the  essence  of  Christian  doctrine. 

Christianity,  as  we  simple  folks  have  imagined,  is  a  fixed  and 
not  a  floating  thing  —  having  an  objective  and  authoritative 
standard  in  the  Scriptures,  being  supported  by  a  powerful  force  of 
external  and  internal  evidence;  the  truths  of  which  enter  into 
tlie  understanding  and  descend  into  the  heart,  quicken  and  purify 
all  its  sensibilities,  and  manifest  their  lovely  fruits  in  the  con- 
versation and  life.  But,  according  to  our  idealist  writers,  reve 
lation  is  spontaneous  and  intuitional,  a  process  of  the  mind 
gazing  intuitively  upon  eternal  verities,  a  thing  altogether  sub- 
jective ;  and  no  other  authority  is  left  to  the  Scriptures  than  in  so 
far  as  they  harmonize  with  the  mind's  intuitions.  "  No  one,"  says 
an  able  reviewer,  "  can  have  read  books  of  this  class — from  tliose 
of  ]Mr.  Carlyle  downwards — without  marking  the  special  aversion 
of  this  whole  school  of  authors  to  what  are  called  the  '  Evidences.' 
By  this  term  they  mean  the  external  and  critical  evidence  which 
determines  the  historical  truthfulness  and  the  just  intei-pretation 
of  the  sacred  writings.  There  is  no  end  to  the  repugnance  evinced 
by  them  tov/ards  this  department  of  investigation."  j- 

In  all  this,  we  see  the  influence  of  the  modern  transcendental 
philosophy,  a  pjiilosophy  subtile,  daring,  proud, — intolerant  of  the 
world  of  realities  lying  without,  and  wliich  assumes  to  weave,  by 
its  own  dialectics,  all  truth  from  the  mind  within.  Let  us  hail, 
from  whatever  quarter  it  may  come,  any  goodly  element  of  vitality 
that  would  quicken  the  good  things  which  remain  and  are  ready 
to  die.  But  let  us  be  jealous  of  every  system,  whatever  be  its 
pretensions,  that  v/ould  transmute  a  Christianity  founded  in  facts, 
into  a  matter  of  the  mind's  own  fashioning;  and  that  would  dis- 
mantle the  towers  and  bulwarks  of  an  historical  Mth  as  if  they 
were  only  fit  for  a  bygone  age.  "  Christianity  comes  to  our  thues 
as  the  survivor  of  all  systems ;  and  after  confronting,  in  turn, 
every  imaginable  form  of  error,  each  of  wliich  has  gone  to  its 
almost  forgotten  place  in  histoiy — itself  alone  lives,"  + — lives,  not 

*  Morell's  Philosophy  of  P.elipou,  preface,  p.  xxii. 
■f-  Biitivh  Quarterly,  No.  xix.  p.  1G7.  *   Taylor's  Spiritual  Christiauity,  p.  6. 


SOCIAL   DISAl'^ECTION.  100 

as  a  creature  of  the  mind's  development, — a  thing  of  mere  senti- 
ment or  intuition,  hut  lives  with  its  firm  footing  in  history,  and 
its  powerful  hold  of  men's  hearts. 

Faith  and  philosophy  are  not  enemies  hy  nature.  They  are 
both  children  of  the  liglit  and  of  the  day,  and  were  designed  ta 
walk  hand  in  hand  through  the  world.  But,  "  in  pride,  in  reason- 
ing pride,  our  error  lies."  Men  have  often  put  asunder  what  God 
hath  joined  together.  Speculation  has  been  arrayed  against  the 
power  of  fact.  Man's  mind,  vainly  puffed  up,  lias  risen  against 
God's  mind.  Philosophy,  having  eitJier  become  sensual  or  vaguely 
transcendental,  has  been  changed  into  that  which  is  devilish  and 
spurious,  and  has  then  fought  against  the  truth  of  God.  But 
"  truth  is  strong  next  to  the  Almighty,"  and  will  prevaiL  Mean  • 
while,  we  note,  that  speculative  philosophy,  whetiier  in  the  form 
of  an  extreme  sensationalism,  or  of  an  extreme  idealism,  has,  as  a 
subordinate  cause,  been  productive  of  no  small  amount  of  infidelity. 
Paul's  exhortation  is  still  needed, — "  Beware  lest  any  man  make 
plunder  of  you,  through  philosophy  and  vain  deceit."  "  Which 
words,"  says  Thomas  Fuller,  *•  seriously  considered,  neither  express 
nor  imply  any  prohibition  of  true  philosophy,  but  rather  tacitly 
commend  it.  Thus,  when  our  Saviour  saith,  '  Beware  of  fi^ls9^ 
prophets,'  by  way  of  opposition,  he  inviteth  them  to  believe  and 
respect  such  as  are  true  ones."  * 


CHAPTER   III. 

SOCIAL     DISAFFECTION. 

Social  agitation  not  always  to  be  deprecated — It  is  often  a  mart  of  riglit  progi-ess — 
Deep  social  discontent  has,  nevertheless,  often  proved  favourable  to  infidelity — 
Great  French  Eevolntion — Social  disabilities  of  the  working  classes — Existing 
social  discontent,  the  stronghold  of  infidel  socialism— Desirableness  of  seveiing 
the  socialist  question  from  irreligious  elements— Injurious  influence  of  the 
prevalent  theories :  they  make  a  religion  of  political  liberty— Attempt  to  identify 
them  with  Christianity  itself — Their  pantheistic  tendency — Admiration  of  po"- 
litical  principles  of  infidels  seductive  in  times  of  social  agitation — Infidelity- 
employed  as  an  organ  of  political  convulsion 

Social  agitation  is  inevitable  in  a  community  that  is  sufiered  to 
develop  its  energies,  and  is,  to  some  extent,  salutary  and  beneficial 
It  often  marks  the  progress  of  a  state  from  barbarism  to  civiliza- 
tion, from  despotism  to  civil  and  religious  liberty.  The  grumbling- 
and  the  upheaving  are  not  unfrequently  syniptoms  of  advancement 
from  a  wrong  to  a  right  position.  There  are  many  things  we  like 
not  the  less,  because  they  are  subject  now  and  then  to  a  shaking, 
and  give  forth  a  growl.  Protestantism,  v/ith  its  conflicting  sects, 
and  hetdthy  rivalries,  is  infinitely  preferable  to  Pionianism  with  its 
leaden  imii'ormity.     Britain,  with  its  free  constitution,  its  limited 

*  Fullers  Hist  of  the  Univ.  of  Cambridge. 


?,00  SOCIAL  DISAFFECTION. 

monarchy,  and  right  of  public  discussion,  is  a  happier  and  safer 
governtnent  than  liussia  under  the  iron  hand  of  absohitism.  The 
storm  tliat  }-ends  the  heavens  and  shakes  the  foundations  of  the 
earth  may  be  attended  witli  many  disasters ;  but  if  it  be  instru- 
mental in  purging  the  atmosphere,  and  rendering  it  salubrious,  it 
is  much  more  desirable  than  the  dead  noxious  calm  in  ^Yhich 
animal  and  vegetable  life  becomes  oppressed.  Our  sympathies 
are  more  with  the  principles  of  a  Sidney  and  a  Hampden,  tlian 
with  those  of  a  Filmer  and  his  modern  disciple,  who  declared  that 
the  people  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  laws  but  to  obey  them. 
Wc  woukl  not,  then,  that  the  political  world  were  lulled  asleep, 
and  that  peoples'  minds  where  drawn  off  from  discussing  the  affairs 
of  government.  For,  whatever  injurious  influence  may  affect  re- 
ligion amid  the  social  hcavings,  it  is  assuredly  not  under  the  pall 
of  despotism  that  it  flourishes  in  its  loveliness  and  vigour.  Political 
science  and  religious  truths  are  not  points  of  repulsion,  and  a 
moderate  attachment  to  the  former  is  not  necessarily  counteractive 
of  the  influence  of  the  latter.  There  is  no  necessary  connection 
between  the  principles  of  political  freedom  and  infidel  opinions. 
It  has  often  been  remarked  that  the  chief  advocates  of  civil  liberty 
in  the  reigns  of  the  Charleses,  were  the  puritans — men  of  whom 
the  world  was  not  worthy,  some  of  whom  were  republicans,  and 
others  of  them  the  firm  adherents  of  a  limited  monarchy.  Amid 
the  storms  of  that  period  the  cradle  of  British  freedom  was  rocked, 
and  rocked  too  by  the  saints,  the  excellent  ones  of  the  earth. 

It  may,  however,  be  safely  maintained,  that  political  agitation, 
when  running  very  high,  has  often  for  a  time  proved  detrimental 
to  spiritual  Christianity,  and  advantageous  to  infidelity.  It  is  not 
for  us  to  balance  the  good  and  bad  effects  of  the  great  French 
Revolution,  which,  in  its  results,  marked  a  new  era  in  the  nations 
of  Europe.  But  there  can  be  no  doubt,  that  the  deep  discontent 
engendered  at  the  heart  of  French  society  by  social  wrongs  and 
abuses,  rendered  the  soil  receptive  of  the  infidel  principles  of  the 
philosophers,  and  that,  in  the  terrible  upheavings  that  followed, 
these  principles  were  carried  forth  triumphantly  like  a  flood.  They 
were  at  once  partly  the  cause  and  partly  the  effect  of  the  social 
disorder.  They  set  fire  to  the  materials  that  had  long  lain  ready 
to  be  kindled,  and  in  the  blaze  they  yelled,  sported,  and  exulted 
like  fiends.  The  enormous  abuses  both  in  the  civil  and  ecclesi- 
astical institutions  of  the  country — the  church  richly  endowed, 
and  yet  leaving  the  mass  of  ignorance  and  vice  around  her  to  grow 
and  strengthen ;  the  venality  and  corruption  wh!ch  characterized 
the  administration  of  justice,  the  unequal  and  oppressive  taxation 
imposed  upon  the  lower  and  middling  classes,  the  mental  degra- 
dation to  which  they  were  subjected  in  consequence  of  long  standing 
feudal  distinctions,  the  luxury  and  frivolity  of  the  court  and  many 
of  the  nobles, — these  and  such  like  abuses,  which  had  separated 


SOCIAL    DISAFFKCTION.  201 

one  part  of  French  society  by  a  great  gulf  from  the  other,  were  the 
elements  which  infidelity  quickened  into  a  convulsion  and  in  whose 
excesses  it  reigned.*  An  ill-taught  and  oppressed  populace,  over- 
borne by  a  corrupt  churcli  and  a  despotic  government,  lies  open 
to  infidel  teaching  when  allied  with  liberal  politics,  and  in  the 
agitation  or  revolt  thereby  produced,  infidelity  finds  its  element. 
Political  and  social  harangues  strongly  interest  the  prejudices  and 
passions  of  mankind,  and  tend,  even  when  containing  no  infidel 
mixture,  to  draw  the  mind  off  from  religious  objects,  unless  they 
meet  with  a  strong  faith  in  eternal  verities  to  counteract  the 
evil.  But  when  such  discussions  are  associated  with  irreligious 
principles,  and  are  brought  to  bear  on  minds  socially  disaffected 
and  at  the  same  time  indifterent  or  hostile  to  vital  Christianity, 
the  influence  on  behalf  of  infidelity  becomes  powerful  indeed.  The 
poison,  mingled  with  the  water,  flows  on  as  fast  as  the  water  itself, 
and  infects  all  who  drink  of  it.  "  The  Rights  of  Man"  renders 
palatable  to  many  minds  "  The  Age  of  Reason." 

This  is  very  much  the  case  with  many  of  the  political  and  social 
theories  afloat  in  our  day,  more  especially  on  the  Continent.  The 
great  problem  in  modern  politics,  is  the  elevation  of  the  industrial 
mind  so  as  to  secure  the  greatest  good  to  society  in  general.  Com- 
paratively few  persons  will  maintain  that  the  arrangements  of 
society  are  as  they  should  and  might  be.  The  spread  of  intelli- 
gence among  the  working  classes  has  made  them  sensible  of  the 
social  disabilities  under  which,  in  many  parts  of  Europe,  they 
have  been  long  lying.  The  rebound  is  fully  proportionate  to  the 
pressure.  And  the  industrial  interests  rising  up  from  the  one 
extreme  of  depression,  would  ascend  to  the  other  extreme  of 
elevation.  The  servant  brooding  over  years  of  neglect  and  harsh 
treatment,  would  now  avenge  himself  by  becoming  lord.  The 
truth  is,  governments,  by  foolishly  continuing  those  restraints  on 
the  popular  mind  in  an  enlightened  age,  which  were  suited  to  a 
past  and  different  state  of  society,  notunfrequently  suffer  a  penalty 
somewhat  similar  to  that  which  a  landed  proprietor  suffers  in 
damming  up  a  stream.  Arbitrarily  checked  in  its  course,  it  swells 
and  chafes  against  the  barrier ;  at  length  it  sweeps  all  before  it, 
and  carries  wasting  and  desolation,  where  it  otherwise  would  have 
contributed  to  the  fertility  and  picturesqueness  of  tlie  countiy. 
Even  in  our  own  England,  which  is  the  home  of  freedom  in 
Europe,  and  which,  in  the  language  of  one  of  our  old  poets, 

"  was  sui-e  desicfnecl 


To  be  the  sacred  refuge  of  mankind," — 


the  consequences  of  past  neglect  are  too  manifest.  There  are  large 
classes  among  us  who,  from  regarding  almost  every  thing  estab- 
lished with  blind  reverence,  have  come  to  look  upon  almost  every 

*  SeeBronghain  on  "Frencli  Eevol.  ("  Statesmen  of  the  Time  of  Geo.  ILL") 


202  SOCIAL    UISAFFECTiOy. 

thing  really  sacred  with  grov^-ing  aversion.  "  In  many  cases.;*  says 
Dr.  Arnold,  "the  real  origin  of  a  man's  irreligion  is,  I  believe, 
political.  He  dislikes  the  actual  state  of  society,  hates  the  church 
as  connected  with  it,  and,  in  his  notions,  supporting  its  abuses, 
and  then  hates  Christianity  because  it  is  tauglit  by  the  church." 

The  problem  to  vdhch  we  have  adverted  is  that  which  the  several 
socialist  schools,  with  their  widely  conflicting  theories,  propose  to 
solve.  The  possibility  of  a  great  and  sudden  amelioration  in  the 
condition  of  the  v/orking  classes,  is  the  common  faith  of  them  all. 
Politically  and  socially  tliey  vary,  and  frown  upon  each  other,  from 
St.  Simoiiianism  with  its  somewhat  hierarchical  arrangement  of 
classes,  to  the  humanist  theory,  the  latest  form  of  socialism,  with 
its  intolerance  of  any  vestige  of  inequality.  But  tested  by  a  reli- 
gious standard,  they  all  bear  the  mark  of  Cain,  are  vagal)onds  on 
the  eartji,  and  the  last  of  them  is  worse  than  the  first.  Owenism, 
though  it  never  had  a  strong  hold  on  any  large  portion  of  the 
English  people,  and  for  some  years  has  been  losing  the  old  that  it 
had,  is  steeped  in  atheism.  It  sees  omnipotence  nowhere  but  in 
external  circumstances.  And  through  this  wretched  system,  appeal- 
ing to  existing  social  disaiiection,  not  a  few  are  to  be  found  here 
and  there  in  our  workshops  and  factories,  who  have  been  led  over  to 
the  ranks  of  infidelity.  In  France,  Germany,  and  other  parts  of 
the  Continent,  socialism  has  leavened  the  masses,  and  is  still 
rapidly  diffusing  itself;  and  —  what  we  wisli  especially  to  mark — 
the  poison  of  infidelity  is  almost  everywhere  mixed  up  with  it.  It 
would  seem  that  the  socialist  theories  of  the  Continent  can  no  more 
keep  neutral  in  reference  to  religion,  than  the  continental  specu- 
lative ])hi]osophies.  Indeed,  these  theories  have,  in  some  measm-e, 
been  tlio  fruit,  or  formed  a  parcel,  of  the  philosophies.  Feuerbach 
and  G]un,  who  are  of  the  extreme  left  Hegelian  party,  are  the 
great  teachers  of  humanism —  a  system  which  finds  every  thing  in 
man,  which  ignores  all  motive  power  but  tlie  human  will,  and 
which  is  as  intolerant  of  the  existence  of  religion  as  of  private 
property. 

There  are  good  men,  in  oiu-  own  country  and  elsewhere,  who, 
being  persuaded  that  socialism  is  no  temporary  ebullition  of  social 
discontent,  but,  as  Mr.  John  Stuart  Mill  remarks,  "  has  now 
become  irrevocably  one  of  the  leading  elements  in  Europ»eau 
politics,"  Avould  seek  to  deal  with  the  questions  involved  in  it  in 
a  Christian  manner.  This  v\'e  deem  praiseworthy.  The  working 
classes  have  been  left  too  much  to  the  will  of  infidel  socialist 
teachers,  v.dio  exaggerate  their  grievances,  Iny  upon  evangelical 
religion  the  bhame  that  belongs  only  to  its  corruptions,  and  hold 
out  to  Ibem  false  hopes  of  amelioration.  They  have  grievances 
■wliieh  must  be  dealt  vv'ith.  And,  convinced  as  we  are  that  ex- 
isting social  arrangem.ents  admit  of  mucl)  improvement,  that  the 
relation  between  the  capitalist  and  the  workman,  tlie  governors 


SOCIAL    DISAFrECTION.  ^03 

and  fhe  gforerned,  might  be  more  satisfactory,  wc  ^ould  have 
Christian  men  hoth  in  the  chin-ch  and  in  the  state  to  step  in  and 
deal  fairly  with  the  socialist  question.  AYe  see  no  necessary  con- 
nection between  it  and  infidelity.  And,  without  giving  any 
opinion  hero  as  to  the  trutli  or  justice  iuYolved  in  its  essential 
principles,  we  would  hiare  it  dissociated  from  the  irreligious 
elements  which  have  been  hitherto  so  much  mixed  up  with  it, 
and  let  it  stand  forth  simply  as  a  question  of  political  economy. 
But,  be  it  the  system  of  Owen,  or  Fourier,  of  Louis  Blauc,  or 
Feuerbach ;  all,  notwithstanding  the  religious  sentinientalism 
that  may  be  found  in  some  of  them,  have  been  of  an  irreligious 
tendency,  and  influential  in  making  democracies  at  once  tierce 
and  ungodly. 

The  lirst  thing,  in  the  way  of  injurious  influence  that  presents 
itself,  on  examining  tliese  theories,  is  the  hope  of  happiness  which 
they  hold  out,  from  entirely  remodelling  the  framework  of  society. 
Diftering  as  they  do  on  important  points  of  polity,  the  prophet  of 
this  scliool  ridiculing  the  j^rophets  of  all  other  schools  as  fanatics 
and  impostors,  they  agree  in  naaking  a  religion  of  political  liberty, 
and  looking  for  Paradise  restored  to  a  new  arrangement  of  pro- 
perty and  industrial  interests.  The  real  devil  of  the  world,  in 
their  estimation,  is  private  property.  The  depravity  and  wretch- 
edness existing  among  men  are  ascribed  to  the  factitious  arrange- 
ments of  society,  and  the  regeneration  of  the  race  is  to  be  ex- 
pected from  thorough-going  social  changes.  It  is  in  vain  that 
history  tells  of  speculations  and  schemes  of  a  similar  character 
having  been  tried  in  the  past,  having  aggravated  instead  of  having 
mitigated  the  miseries  which  they  professed  to  cure,  and  having 
been  numbered  long  ago  among  the  follies  whereby  visionary 
projectors  thought  to  make  a  nev.'  world.  So  long  as  these  specu- 
lations were  not  theirs,  there  is  room,  they  imagine,  for  the" trial 
of  their  own.  The  world  must  have  its  golden  age,  and  these 
prophets  of  a  social  regeneration  are  to  be  instrumental  in  ex- 
alting every  valley,  making  low  every  mountain  and  hill,  making 
the  crooked  straight  and  the  rough  places  plain.  It  were  really 
amusing  to  sit,  as  in  a  panorama,  and  see  how  one  plan  of  the 
world's  reformation  has  absorbed  men's  attention  for  avrhile, 
passed  away  as  a  vain  show,  and  then  given  place  to  another 
destined  to  shaie  the  same  fate,  were  the  thought  not  to  arise 
that  these  visionary  projects  have  not  only  left  society  a  prey  to 
numerous  vices  and  miseries,  but  have  in  a  great  measure 
diverted  men's  minds  from  "  heaven's  easy  unencumbered  plan," 
—  a  plan  which  has  survived  all  otliers,  and  which  experience,  as 
well  as  the  voice  of  God,  assmes  us  is  the  only  one  fitted  to  make 
all  things  new.  It  is  with  this  evil  influence  that  all  the  socialist 
theories  which  have  lately  jilayed  such  a  prominent  part  aie 
fraught.     It  v.-ere  vrell  enough  did  their  abettors  insist  on  social 


204  SOCIAL    DISAFFECTION. 

reforms  as  necessary  to  the  physical  and  moral  Avell-being  of  man. 
But  to  bid  men  look  to  these  reforms  as  the  panacea  of  all  ills, 
the  means  of  regenerating  the  race,  and  bringing  about  a  heaven 
on  earth,  is  as  ungodly  as  it  is  visionary,  as  antagonistic  to  the 
Gospel  of  Christ  as  it  is  deluding  and  destructive  to  men.  Once 
persuade  an  individual  or  any  body  of  individuals  that  all  their 
miseries  originate  in  2)olitical  and  social  causes  —  that  the  soui'ce 
of  the  evil  lies  chiefly  or  exclusively  without,  and  is  to  be  removed 
by  the  prevalence  of  certain  modes  of  education  and  civil  govern- 
ment, and  you  leave  no  room  whatever  for  the  influence  of  that 
truth  which  coming  from  above  is  above  all.  And  yet  tliis  is  the 
teaching  to  which  myriads  of  men  in  our  own  country,  and  more 
especially  on  the  Continent,  have  eagerly  listened  at  the  feet  of 
the  apostles  of  social  regeneration. 

It  has  been  well  said  by  a  respectable  London  journal,-!'-  that 
"the  socialist  principles  are  inevitable  in  any  thinking  country 
which  has  shaken  oil"  religious  belief.  If  the  Christian  dispensa- 
tion does  not  rise  as  the  great  and  all-explaining  truth  before 
man's  eyes,  the  philosopher  cannot  be  contented  with  the  ine- 
quality of  human  condftions,  or  avoid  devising  material  plans 
lor  its  removal.  The  more  unformed  intellect  of  the  poor  will 
eagerly  follow  in  this  path.  And  happiness  being  considered  a 
compound  of  comforts,  he  will  infallibly  ask  by  what  right  he  is 
excluded  from  his  share  of  what  the  earth  and  industry  produce, 
when  his  creed  cannot  enjoin  the  duty  of  patience  or  point  to  any 
present  or  future  compensation."  The  truth  is,  that  in  all  the 
socialist  theories,  as  in  the  great  expectations  cherished  from 
philosopliical  illumination  in  a  preceding  age,  three  very  palpable 
facts  are  forgotten  or  denied.  The  first  is,  that  a  personal  change 
of  heart,  and  not  a  mere  social  or  political  amelioration,  is  the 
indispensa1)le  condition  of  all  real  and  lasting  improvement. 
National  can  only  be  the  effect  of  individual  regeneration.  It  is 
out  of  the  heart,  as  the  Great  Teacher  taught,  that  proceed  the 
things  which  defile  a  man.  And,  Avere  the  external  arrangements 
of  society  ever  so  perfect,  yet,  without  a  radical  change  in  men 
individually,  these  cU-rangements  v/ould  be  ever  liable  to  coiTup- 
tion  and  attended  with  much  misery.  The  second  is,  that  in- 
equalities and  sufferings,  in  some  form  or  another,  are  inseparable 
from  man's  lot  upon  earth.  It  is  a  principle  in  God's  moral  govern- 
ment that  where  there  is  no  sin  there  is  no  suffering.  Sin,  how- 
ever mysterious  the  fact,  has  entered  this  world,  and  suffering  as 
a  penal  consequence  has  followed  it.  And  that  suffering  is  dis- 
ciplinary as  well  as  penal,  'i'he  prophets  of  social  regeneration, 
however,  lay  out  their  perfected  world  in  the  present  state,  and  by 
the  overthrow  of  the  existing  arrangements  of  society,  would  at 

*  The  Daili/  Neus. 


SOCIAL    DISAFFECTION.  205 

once  usher  in  the  new  heavens  and  new  earth.  The  third  thing 
of  which  tliey  are  oblivious  or  disbelieving  is,  that  the  Gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ,  not  a  mere  political  Gospel  whose  favourite  theme 
is  equahty  and  fraternity,  but  a  Gospel  bringing  glad  tidings  of  a 
free  and  full  salvation,  containing  ample  provision  for  expiating 
}iuman  guilt  and  subduing  human  dejiravity,  and  giving  the  hope 
of  life  and  immortality  beyond  the  gi-ave,  is  alone  capable  of  real- 
ising all  the  good  for  which  pants  the  soul  of  humanity.  These 
are  facts  confirmed  by  experience,  and  by  none  more  than  what  is 
learned  from  the  recent  shakings  among  several  of  the  European 
nations.  The  rise  of  a  new  and  better  order  of  things  among 
mankind  is  no  mere  dream  of  projectors.  The  revelations  of 
heaven  warrant  us  to  anticipate  it.  But  we  must  look  for  its 
realisation  chiefly  to  the  influence  of  nobler  principles  than  poli- 
tical and  social  theories.  Grapes  are  not  to  be  gathered  from 
thorns,  nor  figs  from  thistles.  And  to  hold  out,  as  all  socialist  pro- 
jects that  have  been  recently  in  agitation  do,  the  hope  of  happi- 
ness from  new  social  arrangements,  is  to  delude  men  and  abet  the 
cause  of  infidelity.  A  religion  of  political  liberty  is  thus  substi- 
tuted for  the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God. 

The  second  thing,  in  the  way  of  injurious  influence,  noticeable 
in  many  of  these  theories,  is  the  endeavour  to  identify  them  with 
Christianity  itself.  The  existence  of  Christianity  is  an  influential 
fact,  the  sanction  of  which,  other  systems,  however  visionary  and 
destructive  of  its  spirit,  are  anxious  to  obtain.  This  they  can  do 
only  by  misrepresenting  and  virtually  falsifying  it.  In  the  first 
great  Frejach  revolution,  there  was  no  compromise.  It  was  a  war 
of  open  extermination  against  everything  that  bore  the  Christian 
name.  The  infidel  leaders  proclaimed  the  Christian  system  and 
the  institutions  connected  with  it  to  be  the  great  hindrances 
in  the  progress  of  humanity,  and  they  avowed  their  purpose  to 
crush  and  extirpate  the  whole.  But  infidels  now-a-days  are  cove- 
tous of  the  Christian  name,  and  each  one  would  have  his  respective 
system  accounted  the  gospel  which  is  designed  to  regenerate  man- 
land.  Many  of  the  leaders  of  socialism  have  claimed  to  be 
regarded  as  the  faithful  expositors  of  Christianity.  The  reforma- 
tion preached  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  is  declared  to  have  been 
a  social  regeneration.  The  Saviour  of  the  world  is  hailed  as  the 
prince  of  the  communists.  The  substance  of  the  Gosj)el  is  to  be 
found  in  those  texts  which  inculcate  mutual  love  and  affection. 
And  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth,  is  the  reign  of  equality  and 
fraternity.  Hegel,  as  we  have  seen,  recognised  Christianity,  and 
the  leading  doctrines  of  the  Trinity,  incarnation,  and  atonement ; 
but  it  was  only  to  bring  them  within  the  sweep  of  his  law  of  neces- 
sary development,  and  to  destroy  them  as  facts  on  which  men  rest 
their  faith  and  hope.  In  like  manner,  Fourier  and  his  disciples, 
and  even  Pierre  Leroux  the  pantheist,  who  has  been  acknowdedged 


OOS  SOCIAL    DISAFFECTION. 

by  the  French  to  be  the  metaphysician  of  socialism,  have  sought  to 
f^mft  their  speculations  into  Christianity,  and  have  represented  the 
one  as  naturally  rising  out  of  tlie  other.  In  short,  socialism  lays 
hold  of  a  peculiar  characteristic  of  Christianity,  _  which  it  severs 
from  other  and  yet  more  prominent  characteristics,  and  then 
preaching  it  up,  as  if  it  were  the  whole,  does  all  the  mischief  which 
inlide'ht/could  wish.  The  religion  of  paganism  and  of  a  corrupt 
Christianity  have  had  much  of  the  arrogance  and  assumptions  of 
caste  ahout  tliem.  They  have  endeavoured  to  distribute  men  into 
classes,  and  have  had  their  esoteric  and  exoteric  doctrines.  But 
the  characteristic  of  Christianity,  to  which  we  refer,  is,  that  it 
snreads  a  feast  before  all  people,  that  it  makes  little  account  of 
natural  or  artificial  distinctions,  that  it  propounds  and  offers  truth 
without  reserve  to  the  mass  of  mankind.  This  want  of  monopoly 
in  Christianity,  which,  after  all,  is  but  its  external  aspect— the 
bio'-hearted  and  benignant  attitude  which  it  assumes  towards  the 
nations — is  held  up  as  if  it  were  its  essence.  Socialism  loves  the 
generous  and  compassionate  look  of  the  Gospel,  but  it  hates  its 
holy  humbling  requirements.  It  would  substitute  Chiistianity  as 
a  mere  liberal  social  economy,  for  Christianity  as  a  system  of  pui-e 
spiritual  truth.  However  visionary  and  absurd  this  may  appear, 
yet  its  influence  in  promoting  infidelity  among  the  masses  must 
have  been  great.  It  would  be  congenial,  in  the  highest  degree,  to 
the  social  disaffection  that  existed;  and,  though  utterly  destractive 
of  spiritual  Christianity,  would  in  multitudes  of  cases  be  the  more 
welcome  that  it  came  under  the  pretended  sanction  of  Him  whose 
'•  name  is  ploughed  into  the  history  of  the  world."  The  faith  of 
the  French  people,  in  the  nineteenth  century,  is  a  political  faith. 
It  has  no  reference  to  man  as  guilty  before  God  and  radically  de- 
praved; it  does  not  lay  hold  of  the  Gospel  as  in  the  highest  sense 
a  restorative  economy,  and  seeking  to  make  men  free  by  delivering 
them  from  the  state  of  the  condemned,  and  forming  them  to  a  high 
and  holy  character.  It  is  not  a  new  thing  in  the  world's  liistory 
for  infidelity  to  have  propagated  itself  under  the  Christian  name, 
and  with  a  show  of  respect  "to  Christianity's  great  Founder. 

"We  are  led  to  remark,  thirdly,  the  strong  tendency  of  many  of 
the  recent  socialist  theories  toward  pantheism.  —  Humanity  is 
everything  with  them.  The  highest  being  is  man.  The  perfectibility 
of  the  race  is  asserted.  And  in  a  paradise  of  social  interests  here, 
the  idea  of  a  happy  world  beyond  is  excluded.  This  is  more 
especially  the  case  with  the  humanists,  who,  in  their  rejection  of 
an  historical  and  spiritual  Christianity,  are  in  advance  of  other 
schools  of  socialism.  In  fact,  pantheism  has  become  the  orthodox, 
creed  of  the  system.  Tlve  extremes  of  idealism  and  socialism 
meet,  in  declaring  that  religion  comes  not  from  without  but  from 
within,  that  it  has  no  objective  reaUty,  but  is  purely  a  matter  of 
the  mind's  own  creation.     We  say  that  the  sum  and  substance  of 


SOCIAL    DISAFFECTION.  207 

religion  is  to  be  found  in  the  Bible,  a  well-attested  revelation  iroin 
heaven,  and  that  it  only  becomes  the  religion  of  man  individually 
when  it  is  received  by  faith,  and  thus  incorporated  with  all  his 
springs  of  thought  and  feeling.  But  the  humanist  says,  not  so. 
In  man  himself,  or  in  humanity,  is  to  be  found  all  that  constitutes 
religious  truth.  It  is  not  a  thing  without,  lying  in  the  world  of 
facts,  as  the  fortress  on  the  hill  and  the  river  that  runs  at  its  base, 
but  it  is  part  of  man  himself,  having  neither  origin  nor  objec- 
tive reality  independent  of  himself.  Ask  the  apostles  of  this  sys- 
tem, Y\liere  is  yom-  God  ?  They  at  once  reply,  God  is  in  man. 
He  is  incarnate  in  humanity,  aud  dwells  in  every  member  of  the 
human  race.  Man  as  an  individual  dies,  but  humanity  is  in- 
destructible, in  the  continual  reproduction  of  the  race  he  lives; 
and  this  is  the  life  and  immortality  brought  to  light  by  the  gospel 
of  socialism.  This  system  is  just  as  intolerant  of  religion  as  an 
historical  fact,  as  it  is  of  private  property  as  a  thing  existing  in 
law,  and  it  would  proclaim  the  jubilee  of  humanity  by  abolishing 
both.  Socialism,  in  its  advanced  for.n,  has  thus  been  iniluenced 
by  the  extreme  ideal  philosophy;  and,  in  retm-n,  lends  its  helping 
hand  to  annihilate  an  historical  Chiistianity.  If  it  passed  from 
France  to  Germany,  and  was  originated  by  Kousseau  and  the  infidel 
philosophy  of  last  century,  it  has  been  thrown  into  the  German 
mould,  and  has  come  out  in  the  shape  of  undisguised  pantheism, 
■afVnd  vast  multitudes  who  have  neither  the  capacity  nor  the  inclina- 
tion to  follow  the  transcendentalist  philosopher  in  his  lofty  and  be- 
wildering flight,  sit  at  tlie  feet  of  the  socialist  teacher,  and  through 
him  imbibe  all  the  infidelity  with  which  that  philosophy  is  preg- 
nant. Masses  of  men  who  are  socially  disaffected,  and  in  v/hom 
exists  little  or  nothing  of  vital  religion,  and  v/hose  disaffection,  it 
may  be,  is  turned  towards  some  corrupt  form  of  Christianity 
among  them,  are  readily  carried  captive  by  a  pantheistic  socialism. 
Our  last  remark  here  is,  that  admiration  for  the  political  prin- 
ciples of  infidels  often  leads  men  to  think  lightly  of  religion,  and 
ultimately  to  cast  it  off.  This  is  especially  the  case  in  times  of 
social  agitation.  There  is  no  necessary  connection  between  poli- 
tics, be  they  conservative  or  liberal,  and  infidel  opinions.  Pious 
as  well  as  irreligious  men  are  to  be  found  in  the  ranks  of  all 
political  parties.  Principles  of  civil  polity  are  nothing  the  worse, 
because  infidels  have  held  and  advocated  them.  The  famous 
Declaration  of  American  Independence  was  not  the  less  illustrious 
because  Thomas  Jefferson,  who  prepared  it,  unhappily  did  not 
believe  in  the  great  truths  of  the  Gospel.  It  is  true,  however, 
that  those  who  think  favourably  of  the  political  principles  of 
infidels,  are  apt  to  be  drawn  away,  so  as  to  look  with  no  un- 
fi-iendly  eye  on  the  infidel  principles  themselves.  This,  owing 
to  the  original  depraved  bias  of  tlie  mind,  is  likely  to  be  much 
more  frequently  the  case,  than  that  love  for  the  political  prin- 


208  SOCIAL    DISAFFECTION. 

ciples  of  a  Cln-istian  should  lead  men  to  embrace  bis  Chris- 
tianity. It  has  been  not  unreasonably  supposed,  that  admira- 
tion of  Hume  as  a  metaphysician  and  frequent  intercourse 
with  him,  had  no  small  influence  with  Smith  in  inducing  him  to 
expunge  from  his  "  Theory  of  Moral  Sentiments,"  the  well  known 
and  remarkable  passage  in  which  he  recognises  the  doctrines  of 
the  Christian  revelation  as  harmonizing  with  the  original  antici- 
pations of  nature.  And  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  believe,  that 
multitudes  have  been  prejudiced  against  Clmstianity,  being  kept 
from  embracing  it,  or  been  induced  gradually  to  renounce  it,  from 
a  regard  to  the  political  principles  of  the  men  at  whose  feet  they 
have  sat.  This  will  have  be6n  the  case  especially  when  tlie  waters 
at  the  base  of  the  social  edifice  have  been  running  high,  and  men's 
minds  have  been  agitated  under  real  or  imaginary  social  wrongs. 
If  it  has  been  so  with  political  and  social  theories,  containing  no 
irreligious  elements  in  themselves,  but  dangerous  only  when  advo- 
cated by  influential  infidels,  much  more  must  it  have  been  the 
case  with  many  of  the  recent  speculations  of  socialism,  in  which 
the  liberal  political  creed  and  the  infidel  sentiments  have  been  so 
blended  together  that,  in  imbibing  the  one,  men  could  scarcely 
avoid  imbibing  the  other. 

Infidelity  has  come  before  the  industrial  classes  in  our  day 
in  an  alluring  shape.  It  does  not  stand  forth  in  its  own  proper 
character.  It  has  appeared  in  the  garb  of  a  liberal  system  of  poli- 
tics, professing  to  redress  their  grievances,  and  holding  out  to 
them  the  hopes  of  social  elevation.  The  liberal  polity,  from  its 
very  connection,  has  recommended  the  infidel  opinions,  and,  as 
the  former  has  progressed,  so  have  the  latter.  Kobert  HaU  re- 
marks, "  the  eflbrts  of  infidels  to  difl'use  their  principles  among 
the  common  people  is  peculiar  to  the  present  time.  Hume,  Bo- 
lingbroke,  and  Gibbon,  addressed  themselves  to  the  more  polished 
classes.  AVhile  infidelity  was  rare,  it  was  employed  as  the  instru- 
ment of  literary  vanity.  Its  wide  difiusion  having  disqualified  it 
for  answering  that  purpose,  it  is  now  adopted  as  the  organ  of  poli- 
tical convulsion."  He  is  speaking  of  the  time  of  the  great  French 
lievolution,  but  tlie  remark  is  no  less  applicable  to  our  own  age. 
Since  the  close  of  last  century,  political  knowledge  has  made  great 
progress  among  the  people.  It  is  no  longer  with  fiercely  ignorant 
democracies  that  many  European  governments  have  to  deal. 
The  schoolmaster,  in  many  shapes,  has  been  abroad.  Tlie  know- 
ledge imparted  by  him  has  often  served  to  awaken  men  to  a  sense 
of  the  social  evils  by  which  they  are  surrounded,  without  any 
salutary  counteractives  following  the  discovery.  Social  disaflec- 
tion,  tlie  inevitable  consequence  of  letting  light  in  u})on  dark- 
ness, has  been  engendered.  Hot-beds  of  infidel  socialism  have 
thus  been  prepared.  While  governments  have  been  making 
too  much  ado  about  the  people's  duties   and  too   little   about 


THE    COJIKUPTIONS    OF    CHRISTIANITY.  200 

their  rights,  the  socialist  teachers,  with  no  small  measure  of 
success,  have  been  incessantly  calling  the  attention  of  the  masses 
to  their  rights,  and  saying  nothing  or  next  to  nothing  about  their 
duties.  Out  of  the  social  discontent,  occasioned  by  opjiression  or 
neglect,  has  come  forth  an  evil  spirit,  uttering  at  once  threaten- 
ings  against  the  kings  of  the  earth,  and  blasphemies  against  the 
God  of  heaven 


CHAPTER  IV. 

TIIK    COKRUrnOXS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

Not  wonderful  that  Christianity  has  heen  corrupted — It  has  heen  so  with  trutJis 
of  science — No  promise  that  Christianity  should  be  exempted — Corruptions  in 
apostolic  churches— Paul  foretold  them— Christianity  not  to  be  confounded 
Avith  them  or  made  responsible  for  them — Evil  in  judging  of  one  by  the  other — 
Two  evils  flourish  iu  the  bosom  of  coi-rupted  Christianity  :  superstition  and  un- 
ht'Iief— Reciprocal  influence  of  these  — Remark  of  Plutarch— A  corrupted 
Christianity,  and  Romanism  iu  particular,  ministers  to  infidelity  in  three  ways  : 
It  often  produces  aversion  in  cultivated  minds  to  Christianity  itself— The  middle 
ages — France  and  other  Catholic  countries  in  last  century — Remark  of  Macaulay 
— Italy,  Spain,  France,  at  present  time — Tendency  of  Oxford  Tractism — Re 
marks  of  Rogers  and  Whately — It  leaves  the  mass  of  the  people,  in  times  of 
excitement, to  be  captured  by  infidel  leaders— Instanced  in  France — It  furnishes) 
weapons  for  attacking  Christianity  itself— Parallel  between  corruptions  of 
Christianity  and  the  base  citizens  of  a  great  nation. 

The  best  of  things  in  this  world  are  liable  to  bo  perverted  and 
abused.  Good  is  often  made  to  assume  the  shape  of  evil,  and 
then  to  be  evil  spoken  of  Christianity  is  the  very  last  system 
that  could  be  anticipated  to  escape  corruptions.  Its  doctrinal 
truths  are  so  elevating  in  their  character,  and  humbling  to  tlie 
pride  of  the  human  intellect,  that  men  would  be  sure  to  distort 
their  simple  grandeur,  and  bring  them  down  to  the  level  of  their 
own  enfeebled  perceptions.  Its  morality  is  so  strict  and  pure, — 
being  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  heart,  and 
admitting  of  no  compromise  with  aught  that  is  unholy, — as  to  in- 
duce those  who  are  unwilling  to  follow  its  dictates,  and  yet  anxious 
to  have  its  sanction,  to  bend  it  to  their  own  prevailing  inclinations. 
Its  rites  are  so  few,  simple,  and  destitute  of  attractions  to  the 
carnal  mind,  as  to  make  it  no  matter  of  surprise  that  men  who 
seek  righteousness  in  mere  outward  observances,  should  add  to 
their  number,  and  render  them  meet  for  the  lust  of  the  eye. 
Christianity  has  been  frequently  so  much  corrupted  in  its  doctrines, 
morals,  and  institutions,  as  to  "have  rendered  it  somewhat  difficult 
to  trace  any  resemblance  between  the  blotched  copy  and  tlie  fair 
original. 

Every  system  of  trutli  has  been  more  or  less  corrupted  under 
human  influence.  The  sublime  science  of  astronomy  luis  appeared 
in  the  somevvhat  ridiculous  shape  of  astrology.  The  simple 
science  of  chemistry,  in  the  hands  of  the  alchemists,  was  a  science 

P 


•210  THE    COEIIUPTIOXS    OF    CHRISTIAIsITy. 

of  slieer  extravagancies.  Natural  philosojiliy  was  once  represented 
by  magic.  Jurisprudence,  rightly  understood  and  applied,  pro- 
tects the  helpless,  shields  the  innocent,  and  promotes  the  liberty 
and  prosperity  of  a  state ;  but  it  has  often  been  systematized  into 
an  eugine  of  lawless  oppression.  If  these  earthly  things,  which 
are  by  no  means  uncongenial  to  human  nature,  or  at  variance 
with  Its  predominating  tendencies,  have  been  corrupted  in  the 
hands  of  men,  it  is  not  wonderful  that  heavenly  things,  in  coming 
down  to  the  earLh,  should  have  been  subjected  to  a  similar  in- 
fluence. It  might  rather  have  been  anticipated,  that,  in  proportion 
as  the  revelation  from  above  was  purer  and  loftier  than  tlie  prin- 
ciples of  human  conduct,  woidd  men  endeavour  to  distort  and 
corrupt  it. 

It  is  divinely  promised  that  Chri^:;tianity  shall  never  be  destroyed, 
but  there  is  no  promise  that  it  shall,  in  every  case,  be  kept  free 
from  corruptions.     So  far  from  this,  that,  even  under  the  watchful 
23residency  of  inspired  men,  there  were  false  teachers  who  crept 
into  the  church  and  endeavoured  to  pervert  the  Gospel  of  Christ. 
Yea,  Paul,  in  his  farewell  address  to  the  elders  at  Miletus,  not 
only  spake  of  the  "  grievous  wolves  "  that  should  enter  into  the 
church  after  his  departure ;  but  he  warned  them  that,  even  from 
the  midst  of  their  ownselves,  should  men  arise,  teaching  a  cor- 
rupted Gospel,  to  di-aw  away  the  disciples  after  them.     And  the  | 
most  influential  and  extensively  spread  form  of  a  corrupt  Chris- 1 
tianity  that  ever  existed,  was  clearly  foretold  in  the  apostolical  | 
writings.     They  speak  of  damnable  heresies,  of  a  falling  away,  of  |' 
the  man  of  sin  beiug  revealed,  and  of  the  working  of  the  myst -ry  ' 
of  iniquity.  I 

Christianity  is  not,  however,  to  be  confounded  with   its   cor- 1: 
ruptions,  or  made  responsible  for  tl^.em^.     The  solar  light  is  pure  ji 
and  resplendent  in  itself,  though  often  much  bedimmed  in  the! 
dense  medium  through  which  it  passes.     The  fomitain  may  be  r 
clear  as  crystal,  and  cast  up  no  mire  and  dirt,  while  the  streams' 
ai'O  much  polluted.     Tlie  sacred  text  is  to  be  distinguished  iVoin 
the  false  interpretations  that  have  been  given  of  it.    The  doctrines, 
precepts,  and  rites  of  Christianity,  are  to  be  judged  of,  not  as  they': 
appear  in  the  pages  of  the  fathers,  or  as  they  are  exhibited  in  Jlo-j 
manism,  but  as  they  are  made  known  in  the  pages  of  the  apostles,  | 
and  were  originally  held  forth  in  the  churches  wlrich  they  planted. 
Astronomy,  chemistry,  and  jurisprudence,  are  true  sciences ;  but 
•we  would  form  very  unfavourable  opinions  of  tliem,  did  we  esti- 
mate them  by  the  frauds  of  the  astrologer,  the  dreaming  extrava- 
gancies of  tlie  alchemist,  and  the  pleadings  and  practices  of  the 
corrupt  lawyer.     "  In  the  view  of  an  intelligent  and  honest  mind, 
the  religion   of  Christ  stands  as  clear  of  all  connection  with  the 
corruption  of  men,  and  churches,  and  ages,  as  when  it  was  first 
revealed.     It  retains  its  purity  like  Moses  in  Eg}'pt,  or  Daniel  in 


THE    CORHUPTIOXS    OF    CHRISTIANITY,  211 

Babylon,  or  the  Saviour  of  tlio  woild  Himself  wliile  He  mingled 
Avith  scribes  and  pharisees,  or  publicans  and  sinners."  ^' 

The  evil  is,  that  multitudes  persist  in  judging  of  the  grand 
original  from  the  gross  caricature ;  which  is  just  as  if  we  were  to 
form  our  estimate  of  the  Saviour's  character  from  tlie  representa- 
tions given  by  tlie  chief  priests  and  rulers,  instead  of  beholding 
Him  who,  in  the  midst  of  his  enemies,  could  challenge  the  most 
fierce  and  watchful  of  them  to  convince  him  of  sin.  And  it  is  a 
still  greater  evil,  that,  in  consequence  of  taking  away  the  key  of 
knowledge,  suppressing  religious  inquiry,  and  prohibiting  the  pe- 
rusal of  the  Scriptures,  men  have  had  often  no  other  standard  by 
which  to  estimate  Christianity  as  a  revelation  from  heaven,  than 
the  corrupt  form.  It  might  indeed  be  said,  that  the  very  corruption 
of  the  doctrines,  precepts,  and  rites  of  Christianity,  oi-iginating  as 
it  does  in  a  tendency  to  assimilate  the  Divine  to  the  human,  would 
have  made  it  more  accordant  with  the  tastes  of  depraved  human 
nature,  and  thereby  secured  it  a  wider  and  firmer  reception.  Such 
has  been  the  case.  Christianity  in  its  debased  forms  has  had  a 
much  more  extensive  sway,  and  numbered  vastly  more  adherents, 
than  Christianity  as  it  came  from  God,  holy,  benignant,  and  uu- 
deiiled.  But  this  has  only  been  detrimental  to  the  truth  as  it  is 
in  Jesus.  Christianity  in  its  imdefiled  form  is  the  great  antago- 
nistic influence  to  the  pov,'er  of  Satan  on  earth.  He,  the  father 
of  lies  and  the  seducer  from  the  beginning,  has  polluted  the 
streams  in  order  to  divert  men  from  the  fountain.  And  the  Divine 
author  of  Christianity,  whose  prerogative  it  is  to  bring  good  out 
of  evil,  has  permitted  the  advorsaiy,  in  a  considerable  extent,  to 
succeed. 

It  deserves  notice  that  in  the  bosom  of  a  corrupted  Christianity, 
two  evils  flourish  —  superstition  and  unbelief —  and  that  the 
former  is,  in  some  measure,  the  cause  of  the  latter.  It  was  so  with 
the  religions  of  the  old  Pagan  world,  all  of  which  were  gross  cor- 
ruptions of  the  religion  of  nature  ;  as  Romanism  and  some  otlier 
Christianized  forms  are  gross  corruptions  of  the  religion  of  revela- 
tion. The  ignorant  and  debased,  in  the  presence  of  the  corrupt 
system,  generally  sink  into  the  arms  of  an  unbounded  supersti- 
tion ;  wlnle  men  of  cultivated  and  philosophic  minds,  conforming, 
it  may  be,  from  policy,  to  the  outward  ceremonies,  run  off  to  a  cold 
arj  d  hardened  unbelief.  It  is  an  histori  c al  fact  th  at,  in  the  An gustan 
a.;  ■,  when  the  larger  proportion  of  the  Eoman  people  were  swell- 
ing the  number  of  false  gods,  and  yielding  themselves  up  to  the 
most  degrading  superstitions,  (in  which  they  were  countenanced 
by  the  emperor  and  the  nobles,)  the  Epicureans  were  outstripping 
all  other  philosophic  sects  in  the  propagation  of  their  infidel  prin- 

*  Foster's  Essays,  p.  195. 

p  2 


212  THE    CORRUPTIONS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

ciples.  The  priest  laughed  in  his  sleeves  at  the  delusions  of 
the  people  whom  he  himself  was  deluding;  the  orator,  in  the 
senate,  avowed  his  disbelief  of  a  future  life,  and  repudiated  the 
falmlous  legends  respecting  the  gods  and  the  infernal  world;  and 
the  historian,  in  quoting  the  popular  religious  traditions,  mtmiated 
that  he  did  not  believe  them.  The  infection  spread  from  the 
liigher  and  more  intelligent  classes  to  the  illiterate  multitude,  and 
manv,  in  renouncing  the  gross  fables  of  Paganism,  shook  otF  all 
belief  in  invisible  power  and  immortality. 

Plutarch,  whom  Tholuck  has  characterized  as  the  mdividual 
amono-  the  ancients  that  has  spoken  of  belief,  unbelief,  and  super- 
stition with  the  greatest  wisdom  and  the  deepest  knowledge  of 
mankind,  has  said,  "  unbelief  never  gives  occasion  for  superstition, 
while  the  latter  does  not  unfrequeutly  occasion  the  former;  for 
when  we  teach  perverted  views  in  reference  to  divine  things,  we 
hold  out  occasion  for  total  scepticism."  The  first  of  these  state- 
ments is  bv  no  means  to  be  assented  to.  The  extreme  of  unbelief 
has  often  led  to  the  extreme  of  superstition.  :Men  from  believing 
almost  nothing,  have  come  to  believe  almost  everything.  Into  the 
void  created  by  infidelity,  superstitions  have  rushed  and  been 
eagerly  received  ;  just  as  the  prodigal  son,  in  the  parable,  would 
have  welcomed  the  husks,  when  he  began  to  be  in  want.--:^  But 
what  Plutarch  says  of  superstition  as  the  cause  of  unbelief,  is 
accurate  and  profound.  And  not  less  worthy  of  his  wisdom  is  his 
admoDition,  in  respect  to  the  prevailing  tendency  of  his  age,  "  let 
every  man  be  well  on  his  guard,  that  in  order  to  escape  robbers,  he 
do  not  plunge  into  an  impassable  chasm;  that  while  escaping  from 
superstition,  he  do  not  fall  into  the  power  of  unbelief,  by  leaping 
over  that  which  lies  between  them,  viz.  true  piety."  f 

Superstition  and  unbelief,  in  the  ancient  world,  generally  in- 
creased as  the  corruptions  of  religion  developed  themselves.  And 
multitudes,  knowing  of  no  other  alternative  than  the  robbers  or 
the  chasm,  escaped  from  the  former  and  plunged  into  the  latter. 
So  has  it  been  in  the  presence  of  a  corrupted  Christianity.  The 
religion  of  nature  was  in  nowise  responsible  for  the  corruptions 
in  which  heathenism  enveloped  it.  The  heavens  declared  the 
glory  of  God  and  the  firmament  showed  forth  his  handiwork,  not- 
withstanding the  unbounded  superstition  and  unbelief  that  pre- 
yailed.     The  religion  of  revelation  stands  clear  of  all  the  dis- 

*  Neander  states  yeiT  truly  tlie  mutual  connection  >elwccn  superstition  and 
unbelief:  "  These  two  distempered  conditions  of  the  spiritual  hfe  are  but  opposite 
symptoms  of  the  same  fundamental  evil,  of  which  the  0V?.^^"T!fti!pf.lS,C«ses 
other.  When  once  the  inner  life  is  become  thoroughly  wor  div,  it  eUhe  ^3«"^-;  ^ 
all  religious  feeling  and  abandons  itself  to  infidelity  ;  or,  feuding  itstlMuthth.t 
feeling  gives  to  it  an  interpretation  of  its  own,  and  thus  turns  it  to  supeist  iod. 
•Jhe  desperation  of  unbelief  surrenders  the  troubled  ^o"^^^^"^,^,,^  Pi.^^i^Tthe 
stition;  and  the  irrationalitv  of  superstition  makes  religipu  suspected  by  the 
thoucjhlful  mind."—  Church  Hist.  vol.  i.  p.  18.     (Bohn  s  edition.) 

+  Tholuck  on  the  Moral  Influence  of  Heathenism,  p.  /i. 


THE    CORRUPTIONS    Ofc    CHRISTIANITY.  213 

tortious  into  which  men  have  wrouglit  it,  and  of  all  the  abomina- 
tions with  which  tliey  have  associated  it.  It  brings  glory  to  God 
in  the  highest,  peace  on  earth,  and  good-will  toward  men.  But 
the  fine  gold  has  been  changed  ;  and  in  tossing  away  the  countei-- 
feit,  men  have  often  lost  sight  of  the  heavenly  reality.  The  counter- 
feit, however,  must  bear  a  portion  of  the  guilt  in  the  dishonour  done 
to  the  pure  original ;  and  to  a  corrupted  Christianity,  as  a  subor- 
dinate cause,  must  be  assigned  no  small  amount  of  influence  in 
occasioning  the  rejection  of  Christianity  itself.  Dr.  Arnold  be- 
lieved the  great  cause  of  hinderance  to  the  triumph  of  Christianity 
to  lie  in  the  corruption  not  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  but  of  tlie 
church  of  Christ.  The  distinction  serves  only  to  mark  off  more 
broadly  the  Divine  revelation  from  the  human  corruptions,  while 
it  leaves  the  latter  to  bear  much  of  the  blame  of  the  rejection  of 
the  former.  "  Christianity,"  says  he,  "  being  intended  to  remedy 
the  intensity  of  the  fall  by  its  religion,  and  the  universality  of  the 
evil  by  its  church,  has  succeeded  in  the  first  because  its  religioa 
has  been  retained  as  God  gave  it,  but  has  failed  in  the  second,  be- 
cause its  church  has  been  greatly  corrupted." 

Eomanism  is  not  the  only  form  of  a  corrupted  Christianity. 
There  is  the  Greek  church,  in  which  are  to  be  found  many  of  the 
same  corruptions  as  are  found  in  the  Romish.  There,  in  the  very 
bosom  of  Protestantism,  are  the  Tractarians;  "those  factors  for 
Eome,"  as  Archbishop  Whately  calls  them,  who  "  remind  one  of 
Charon,  in  the  old  mythology,  that  '  grim  ferryman  whom  poets 
write  of,'  continually  ferrying  over  multitudes  across  the  '  melan- 
choly flood,'  to  a  gloomy  shore,  from  which  he  regularly  returned 
himself  alone,  to  take  in  a  fresh  cargo."*  And,  under  the  same 
category  of  a  con-upted  Christianity,  must  come  much  of  the 
nominal  Protestantism  of  the  Continent,  out  of  which  has  arisen 
a  cold,  deadening  rationalism.  But  Ptomanism  occupies  the  bad 
l)re-eminence.  Most  of  the  other  distorted  shapes  have  been  but 
mole-hills,  this  is  the  great  and  hideous  mountain.  That  salvation, 
is  attainable  in  the  Romish  church,  we  no  more  doubt  than  we 
question  the  exalted  piety  of  such  men  as  Borromeo,  Fenelon, 
and  Pascal.  But,  consistent  with  this  admission,  history  bears 
us  out  in  affirming,  that  it  is  the  most  corrupt  form  of  Christianity 
that  has  prevailed  to  any  considerable  extent;  and  that,  in  pro- 
portion as  it  gains  gi-ound,  the  pure  spiritual  Christianity  of  the 
New  Testament  is  supplanted  or  impeded,  and  superstition  and 
imbelief  appear.  It  has  no  more  been  able  wholly  to  extinguish 
the  flame  of  vital  piety,  than  the  Egj^ptian  bondage  was  to  crush 
the  Israelitish  spirit.  Even  when  a  thick  darkness  that  might  be 
felt  has  overspread  the  land,  the  children  of  Israel  have  had  Hght 
in  their  dwellings.     But  how  large  a  space  does  it  occupy  in  the 

*  Cautions  for  the  Times,  p.  302. 


214  THE    CORRCJPTIOXS    OF    CHRISTIANITY. 

history  of  the  church  and  the  woiicl ;  how  very  numerous  are  the 
pomts  of  contrast  which  it  presents  to  the  simple  trutli  as  it  is  in 
Jesus ;  and,  itself  the  offspring  of  darkness,  how  great  the  darkness 
in  which  it  has  slirouded,  for  ages,  a  large  portion  of  humanity ! 

It  is  of  the  system  as  a  whole  that  we  speak.  AYe  know  that 
within  its  pale  exist  men  of  erery  grade,  from  the  spiiitually 
minded  dovvn  to  the  grossly  superstitious  and  idolatrous.  And,  as 
a  system,  it  is  douhtless  the  most  corrupt  that  ever  bore  the  Chris- 
tian name,  and  has  proved  more  prejudicial  to  the  pure  Gospel  of 
Christ  than  any  or  all  of  the  coiTupt  systems  which  have  not  pro- 
fessedly waged  war  against  it.  It  may  claim  a  venerable  anti- 
quity, but  Christianity,  as  it  came  down  from  heaven,  clothed  in 
line  linen  clean  and  white,  dates  beyond  it.  And  the  centuries 
that  it  reckons  up  in  its  age,  only  remind  us  how  very  soon  the 
mystery  of  iniquity  began  to  work,  and  the  fine  gold  became  dim. 
If'^that  be  not  the  most  coiTupt  form  of  Christianity,  which,  under 
the  penalty  of  anatliemas  forbids  the  common  people  to  read  the 
Scriptures,  denies  that  they  are  a  complete  rule  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice, and  exalts  vain  traditions  as  of  equal  authority;  if  that  be 
not  the  most  corrupt  which  enjoins  the  worship  of  saints,  images, 
and  relics ;  virtually  denies  the  perfection  of  the  Christian  atone- 
ment by  offering  up  the  sacrifice  of  the  mass,  multiplies  the 
number  of  the  sacraments,  and  loads  the  simple  divine  institutes 
with  a  gorgeous  host  of  ceremonies;  if  that  be  not  the  most  coiTupt 
which  enslaves  the  mind  and  keeps  it  in  ignorance,  and  which,  in 
making  darkness  its  pavilion,  is  ever  jealous  of  the  light;  we  know 
not  where  a  corrupted  Christianity  is  to  be  foimd.  It  preserves 
the  name  of  Christianity,  and,  nominally,  at  least,  retains  its 
doctrines;  but,  under  an  enormous  mass  of  corruptions,  entombs 
its  spirit. 

It  is  not  as  now  existing  in  Protestant  countries,  surrounded 
and  in  a  great  measure  influenced  by  the  light  of  the  Reformation, 
that  we  are  to  form  our  estimate  of  it,  but  as  it  appears  in  Italy 
and  Spain,  where  it  develops  itself  according  to  the  authorized 
canons  of  the  church ;  and  even  there  it  is  somewhat  under  the 
check  of  the  advancing  mind  of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  had 
its  origin  in  the  attempt  to  reconcile  the  adherents  of  tlio  worn-out 
pagan  worship,  who  were  scattered  in  considerable  numbers 
throughout  the  empire,  to  the  Christian  faith  which  had  silenced 
the  oracles  and  overthrown  the  altars  of  polytheism.  It  was  a 
kind  of  compromise  between  the  old  worshiiJ  and  the  new.  The 
church  hierarchy,  so  early  as  the  days  of  Constantino,  evinced 
a  tendency  (so  often  shown  since  by  Piomish  missionaries)  to 
give  Christian  baptism  to  individuals  while  yet  in  the  bosom  of 
heathenism,  and  to  make  old  superstitious  practices  fit  into  ths 
Christian  worship.  The  striking  resemblance  between  the  super- 
stitions of  Papal  Eome  and  Pagan  Home,  has  often  been  pointed 


THE    CORRUPTiOKS    OF    CHRISTIANITY.  215- 

out.  Eoraanism,  by  its  j^erversious  of  ^-eat  Christian  doctiineSr 
and  by  tho  meretricious  ornaments  with  which  it  has  loaded 
simple  Christian  rites,  has  earned  the  title  of  a  bai^tized  paganism. 
No  enlightened  mind,  looking  at  Christianity  as  it  is  taught  in 
the  New  Testament,  and  exemplified  by  the  apostles  and  early 
churches,  and  comparing  it  with  the  Papal  system  as  enunciated 
in  the  decrees  of  councils,  embodied  in  its  existing  institutions, 
and  manifested  in  the  moral  condition  of  those  lands  where  it 
predominates,  can  help  concluding  thatPopeiy  is  the  most  decrepit 
and  corrupt  form  of  Christianity. 

"  hi  the  stagnant  marshes  of  corrupted  Cliristianity,"  remarks- 
Robert  Hall,  "  infidelity  has  been  bred."  Romanism  has  nourished 
the  grossest  superstitions,  and  given  rise  to  the  most  dissolute- 
scepticism.  By  locking  up  the  treasures  of  divine  knowledge,  and 
substituting  penances,  indulgences,  and  pompous  ceremonies,  for 
an  enlightened  and  operative  faith,  she  has  kept  the  great  mass  of 
her  people  as  ignorant  and  slavishly  superstitious  as  Hindoos; 
while  she  has  disgusted  the  more  intelligent,  and  driven  them  into 
secret  or  open  infidelity. 

It  will  be  found,  then,  that  there  are  three  ways  in  which  a 
corrupted  Christianity,  and  more  especially  the  Papacy,  the  master- 
piece of  corruptions,  ministers  to  infidelity. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  it  often  produces  aversion  in  cultivated  amV 
rejecting  minds  to  Ghristianitij  itself.  Men  have  often  known- 
Christianity  only  by  Popery  —  its  most  corrupt  form.  The 
Romish  chiu-ch  and  tlie  Christian  church,  the  Catholic  doctrines 
and  the  Gospel  doctrines,  they  have  been  taught  to  consider  as 
identical.  All  the  good  effected  by  Christianity  in  the  world,  is 
(claimed  for  the  Papacy.  M.  de  Falloux,  one  of  the  most  staunch 
Romanists  among  the  French  statesmen,  strikingly  confounded. 
Christianity  with  Romanism,  when,  in  a  recent  speech  in  the- 
French  Assembly,  he  went  on  to  say  the  Papacy  has  done  this  good 
and  that  good.  All  the  corruptions  of  Popery,  on  the  other  hand, 
are  laid  by  multitudes  at  the  door  of  Christianity.  If  they  read  his- 
tory, so  large  a  space  does  Romanism  occupy,  that,  (overlooking  the 
little  uncorrupted  church  of  Christ  which  has  ever  been  as  a  green 
islet  in  a  troubled  sea  or  as  a  light  shining  in  a  dark  place,)  the 
history  of  the  Papacy  is  with  them  the  history  of  Christianity.. 
And  that  history  is  dark,  foul,  and  loathsome.  It  is  a  series  of 
dire  opj)ressions,  and  hideous- corruptions;  the  record  of  a  systeni- 
which,  professing  to  free  and  elevate  man,  has  debased  and  en- 
slaved him ;  a  system  loving  the  darkness  and  hating  the  light,, 
full  of  pious  frauds  and  outrageous  crimes.  They  look  around 
the  land  in  which  they  dwell,  and  Romanism,  unchangeable  in  its 
mummeries  and  corruptions,  in  its  enslaving  and  benighting  in- 
fluences, I'ises  up  before  them  as  the  all-explaining  fact  of  the 
Christian  Dispensation.      Sucli  men,  on  becoming  enliglitened. 


filQ  THE    CORRUPTIONS    OF    CIIRISTIANJTi'. 

and  emerging  out  of  the  superstition  in  wbicli  the  masses  are 
sunk,  iuvvardjy,  if  not  avowedly,  loathe  the  gross  doctrines,  cum- 
bersome rites,  and  absurd  practices  of  the  church.  And  if  they 
know  not  a  purer  faith,  or,  by  the  very  loathing  whicli  tliey  have 
contracted,  are  averse  to  inquire  after  it,  the  consequence  will  be 
either  that,  retaining,  from  policy,  an  outward  connection  v/ith 
Eome,  they  secretly  cherish  iniiclelity ;  or,  adopting  an  honester 
though  still  a  fatal  course,  they  pass  openly  over  to  the  ranks  of 
those  who  denounce  Christianity  as  a  cunningly-devised  fable. 

This  is  no  mere  supposition.  The  history  of  the  past  and  the 
experience  of  the  present  corroborate  it.  During  the  dark  ages, 
Cbristianity,  in  the  hands  of  llomanism,  sunk  into  the  grossest  sujjer- 
stition ;  and  that  superstition  was  the  occasion  of  a  vast  amount  of 
tlie  then  existing  infidelity.  A  pure  Gospel  was  then,  as  always,  in 
the  world,  but  it  was  wandering  in  deserts,  and  in  mountains'^  and 
in  dens,  and  caves  of  the  earth,  being  destitute,  afSicted,  tormented. 
It  was  a  sadly  depraved  Christianity,  more  like  a  demon  of  dark- 
ness than  an  angel  of  light,  that  stood  before  men;  and  no  wonder 
that  multitudes  mistook  the  demon  for  the  angel,  and  in  rejecting 
the  one,  rejected  the  other  also.  In  the  fifteenth  century,  when 
monkisli  superstition  overspread  the  world  —  a  thick  darkness 
that  preceded  the  break  of  day — men  of  learning  and  classical 
attainments  in  the  church,  sucli  as  Leo  the  Tenth,  Bembo,  and 
many  others,  wei-e  infidels;  and  their  infidelity,  even  amid  the 
abounding  degeneracy,  they  could  scarcely  conceal.  Under  the 
shadow  of  the  churcli  were  at  once  nourished  a  gross  superstition 
and  a  profligate  scepticism. 

It  was  even  so  in  the  latter  half  of  last  century.  Protestantism 
had,  in  many  quarters,  sinik  into  a  dee]")  apathy.  A  dry  and 
sapless  orthodoxy,  followed  by  a  carnal  life,  had  supplanted  the 
life-giving  Gospel  in  the  churches.  Pvomanism,  on  the  other 
hand,  had  increased  greatly  in  insolence  and  corruptions.  The 
pure  form  of  Christianity,  except  in  a  few  places,  had  lost  its 
vigour ;  and  the  corrupt  form  had  become  proportionably  more 
corrupt.  The  consequence  was  an  inexpressible  disgust  in  the 
minds  of  enlightened  men  at  the  doctrines  and  practices  of  the 
Romish  church,  followed  afterwards  by  an  outburst  of  infidelity 
and  impiety.  The  church  of  France,  before  the  llevolution  of 
1789,  had  left  the  great  mass  of  the  people  in  the  most  extreme 
ignorance,  and  had  disguised  religion  in  a  tissue  of  frauds  and 
impostures.  Its  intestine  quarrels,  its  grievous  oppressions,  its 
benighting  influences,  its  absurd  pagan  mummeries,  had  rendered  it 
an  object  of  disgust  and  contempt  to  the  more  intelligent  portion 
of  the  nation.  Tlie  spirit  of  infidelity  waxed  mightily.  Ilomanisin, 
being  the  only  form  of  Christian ity'^tli at  came  prominently  under 
men's  notice,  was  confounded  or  identified  with  Christianity  itself. 
And   men,  in   making  a  rebound  from  a  gross  and  oupressive 


THE    COREUPTIONS    OF    CHHTSTIANITY.  217 

superstition,  overlooked  the  little  true  piety  that  lay  between,  and 
fell  into  the  abyss  of  unbelief.  The  growing  corruptions  of  the 
system  opened  men's  eyes,  and  convinced  them  of  its  falsehood; 
and  some  being  unwilling,  and  others  unable,  to  make  a  dis- 
tinction between  Christianity  as  a  revelation  from  lieaven,  and 
Christianity  as  distorted  and  deformed  by  Popery,  the  former  had 
to  bear  the  crimes  of  the  latter,  and,  in  the  fierce  onset,  tlie 
destruction  of  Eomanism  was  hailed  as  the  abolition  of  Chris- 
tianity itself.  The  Archbishop  of  Paris  and  others,  in  publicly 
renouncing  Popery,  proclaimed  their  disbelief  in  Christianity. 

Such  was  the  case,  to  a  considerable  extent,  in  all  the  other 
Catholic  countries  of  Europe,  during  last  century.  'J'he  churcli  of 
Piome  was  fast  losing  its  hold  on  men's  minds.  Infidelity,  in 
many  places,  gained  tlie  ascendant.  Multitudes,  in  escaping  from 
superstition,  rushed  into  unbelief  Mr.  Macaulay  remarks,  that 
"  at  the  time  of  the  Pveformation,  whole  nations  renounced  Popeiy 
without  ceasing  to  believe  in  a  First  Cause,  in  a  future  life,  or  in 
the  Divine  mission  of  Jesus.  In  the  last  century,  on  tlie  other 
hand,  when  a  Catholic  renounced  his  belief  in  the  real  presence, 
it  was  a  thousand  to  one  that  he  renounced  his  belief  in  the  Gospel 
too."-  The  reason  of  the  difference  is  obvious.  The  Peformation 
was  a  voice  calling  aloud,  like  a  trumpet,  on  the  slumbering  nations 
to  awake.  It  Avas  liberty,  in  all  the  vigour  of  youth,  imdoing  the 
heavy  burdens,  breaking^  every  yoke,  and  bidding  tlie  oppressed  go 
free.  It  was  the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God,  as  fresh  and  mighty 
as  when  preached  by  Paul,  proclaiming  the  acceptable  year  of  the 
Lord,  and  bringing  the  good  news  of  a  free  and  full  salvation  to 
distressed  and  wearied  souls.  The  men  who  called  upon  others  to 
escape  from  the  robbers  pointed  them  to  the  city  of  refuge,  and 
thus  the  nations  escaped  the  chasm.  13 ut  the  Protestantism  of 
the  Continent,  during  the  eighteenth  century,  had,  to  a  fearful 
extent,  lost  the  life  which  the  Ileformation  originally  breathed 
into  it.  It  was  slumbering  on  the  lap  of  rationalism.  The  trum- 
pet had  fallen  from  its  lips.  It  had  substituted  mere  abstractions, 
or  negations,  for  the  life-giving  w^ord.  And  when  multitudes  were 
rushing,  like  prisoners  let  loose,  from  an  oppressive  superstition, 
Protestantism,  shorn  of  its  locks,  wanted  the  power  to  arrest  them 
at  an  intermediate  point,  and  prevent  them  from  falling  into  the 
abyss  of  infidelity. 

Again,  if  we  look  to  those  parts  of  the  Continent  where  a  cor- 
rupted Christianity  is  dominant  in  our  own  day,  we  find  abundant 
illustrations  of  the  position  which  we  are  endeavouring  to  establish. 
These  two  excrescences  of  religious  life,  as  Tholuck  calls  them, 
superstition  and  unbelief,  appear  very  prominently.  One  portion 
of  the  people,  generally  the  more  ignorant,  are  sunk  in  supersti- 

*  Eeview  of  Ranke's  History  of  Ihe  Popes. 


>18  THE    COREUPTIONS    OF    CHniSTlANITY. 

;ion,  and  blindly  devoted  to  gross  ceremonies.  The  otlier.  and 
nore  enlightened  portion,  (saving  tliose  who  have  embraced  the 
genuine  Gospel,)  having  confounded  the  pure  and  the  corrupt, 
lave  lapsed  into  secret  or  open  unbelief.  In  the  bosom  of  Eoman- 
sm  men  have  been  taught  to  regard  every  species  of  Protastantism 
is  an  upstart  faith,  and  lying  without  the  pale  of  the  true  church, 
iud  multitudes,  in  abandoning  the  one  for  its  corruptions,  have 
lot  been  divested  of  their  prejudices  in  reference  to  Ihe  other  so 
IS  to  seek  in  it  a  religious  home.  It  has  been  deemed  no  libel  to 
iffirm  that  many  intelligent  Romanists  on  the  Continent,  v/ho  are 
;oo  clear-sighted  to  be  befooled  by  the  mummeries  of  the  Papacy, 
md  too  politic  openly  to  proclaim  their  hostility,  have  no  faith  in 
he  Christian  revelation.  In  Italy,  in  Spain,  and  France,  Ptoman- 
sm,  in  the  eyes  of  the  nation,  is  Christianity,  and  Christianity  is 
^.omauism.  Men  still  judge  of  the  pure  gold  by  the  base  counter- 
eit,  tliey  decide  on  the  merits  of  .the  heavenly  original  by  the 
'arthly  caricature.  Indeed,  in  many  cases,  the  distorted  form  is 
till  the  only  shape  in  which  Christianity  comes  under  observa- 
ion,  so  that,  in  losing  then-  hold  of  the  one,  men  give  up  all  the 
Christianity  that  ever  they  knew.  And  in  other  cases,  the  rebound 
rom  Romanism,  in  cultivated  minds,  is  proportioned  to  the  former 
)ressure,  so  that,  to  repeat  Plutarch's  saying,  men  in  escaping 
i-orn  the  robbers,  plunge  into  the  chasm. 

"  Italy,"  says  Dr.  Achilli,  "  pants  to  shake  off  Popeiy.  But,  with 
ew  exceptions,  men  who  have  seen  Popery  and  Christianity  so 
iitimately  connected  with  one  another,  have  not  spiritual  discern- 
[lent  to  separate  the  one  from  the  other,  and  with  the  falsehoods 
if  Rome  they  reject  the  sublimest  truths  of  Christianity.  .  .  . 
taly  is  full  of  men  who,  ceasing  to  believe  in  the  Romish  dogmas, 
lave  ceased  to  believe  in  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
)ne  main  cause  of  this  is  their  ignorance  of  Holy  Scripture." 
Pantheism  and  deism  are,  accordingly,  occupying  much  of  the 
•round  in  the  Italian  peninsula  which  has  been  prepared,  though 
ost,  by  Romish  superstition.  Dr.  James  Thomson,  v/hose  acquaint- 
,nce  with  the  moral  and  religious  condition  of  Spain  is  so  extensive, 
ells  us,  that  "  many  of  the  middling  classes  are  free-thinkers  or 
.theists.  They  could  not  be  easily  brought  to  read  the  Bible,  for 
>eing  disgusted  with  priestcraft  and  its  impositions,  they  believe 
LOthing  and  will  hear  of  nothing."  The  corruptions  of  Christianity 
Q  that  once  proud  land  are  fearfully  glaring,  and  infidelity,  as  the 
onsequence,  is  ravaging  the  country.  Romish  pretensions  in 
^rance,  since  the  revolution  of  1848,  have  revived.  But  France 
>as  no  faith  in  them.  They  may  be  made  to  play  a  part  in  the 
hifting  scenes  of  the  political  drama.  But  discerning  men  pre- 
lict  that  they  will  revive  the  spirit  of  Voltaire,  and  extend  the 
lominiou  of  infidelity.  "  For  tiie  gi'eat  masses  of  our  French 
)opulation,"  says  ]\I.  Roussel,  "  Christianity  is  Romanism,  and 


THE    CORRUPTIONS    OF   CHRISTIANITY.  219 

Eomanism  is  the  mass,  confessioii,  ceremonies,  fasts,  and  a  tlioii- 
sand  ridiculous  superstitions ;  and  here  we  have  a  distinct  reason 
why  infidelity  prevails  in  France." 

And,  to  come  home,  what  have  we  in  the  "  Oxford  School"  but 
a  source  of  corruption,  one  stream  of  which  is  continually  running 
to  Eome,  and  another  going  off  to  scepticism.  Mr.  Henry  Eogers 
affirmed,  in  1843,  in  an  article  in  the  Edinhior/h  Review,  that 
"  the  desperate  assertion  that  the  'evidence  for  Christianity'  was 
no  stronger  than  that  for  '  church  principles,'  must,  by  reaction, 
lead  on  to  an  outbreak  of  infidelity."  And  he  can  now  say,  "that 
prophecy  has  been  to  the  letter  accomplished."*  Newman,  Fox- 
ton,  Fronde,  and  others,  who  are  waging  war  against  Christianity, 
ai-e  the  result. 

The  present  Archbishop  of  Dublin  devotes  several  numbers  of 
his  "  Cautions  for  the  Times,"  to  show  that  the  Tractite  party  in 
depreciating  the  investigation  of  Christian  evidence,  and  insisting 
on  an  implicit  faith  in  what  is  taught ;  in  putting  the  SGrij)ture- 
miracles  on  a  level  with  the  absurd  miracles  of  later  times;  in 
covertly  and  by  implication  discouraging  the  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  exalting  the  authority  of  "  traditionary  revelation ; " 
in  earnestly  deprecating  the  exercise  of  private  judgment  in  reli- 
gious matters ;  and  in  making  Christianity  assume  the  form  of 
a  religion  of  mere  outv^'ard  rites  and  observances;  —  are  doing 
"more  to  shake  the  authority  of  Scripture  than  all  the  attacks 
made  by  infidels  directly  upon  it,  ever  have  done,  or  ever  can  do. 
For  Scripture  is,  in  itself,  invulnerable;  and  they  who  attack  it, 
do  but  dash  themselves  to  pieces  against  a  rock.  But  it  may  be 
easily  shown  that  'the  fathers  of  the  church'  are  mere  human 
teachers,  who  often  deliver  false,  and  sometimes  even  absurd 
things,  as  true  doctrine.  To  encumber  Clnistianity,  therefore, 
with  the  defence  of  their  errors  and  absurdities, — and  make  that 
essential  to  the  safety  of  our  religion,  —  is  voluntarily  to  exchange 
an  impregnable  fortress  for  a  position  which  cannot  be  maintained 
against  the  enemy."f  Once  persuade  men,  as  the  Oxford  Trac- 
tarians  endeavour  to  do,  that  there  is  no  alternative  between  their 
church  princinles  and  infidelity,  and  many,  seeing  the  sony  foun- 
dation on  which  the  former  rest,  will  be  led  to  pass  over  to  the 
latter.  "  One  might  almost  thank  you,"  said  a  thoughtful  young 
man,  on  leaving  the  church  of  St.  Mary's,  Oxford,  Avliere  one  of 
the  most  determined  of  the  Tractarian  preachers  had  been  holding 
forth  in  this  strain,  — "  one  might  almost  thank  you  for  infidelity 
as  an  antagonist  to  this  God-dishonouring  and  man-debasing 
system."!  Thus  it  is  that  superstition,  baptized  with  the  Chris 
tian  name,  leads  on,  by  reaction,  to  unbelief 

2.  Another  way  in  which  a  corrupted  Christianity,  and  more 

*  Eeason  auci  Faith.  +  Cautions  fov  the  Times,  p.  243. 

t  Christian  Times  (Nov.  1850). 


20  THE    COnKUPTIONS    OF    CHIlISTIANTTY 

specially  the  Papacy,  ministers  to  infidelity,  is, — that  it  leaves 
he  mass  of  the  j^eo-ple,  among  ivhom  it  prevails,  to  be  captured  bjj 
ifidel  leaders  in  times  of  national  excitement.  The  times  of  the 
reat  French  revolution  furnished  ahundant  and  feai'ful  illustra- 
Lons  of  the  truth  of  this  remark.  The  only  religion  which  the 
reat  body  of  the  French  people,  at  the  period  referred  to,  was 
miiliar  with,  was  a  bastard  Christianity.  And  that  bastard  had 
oodwinked,  pilfered,  and  enslaved  them.  It  had  interdicted 
eligious  inquiry,  it  had  jealously  withheld  from  them  the  pure 
'ord  of  life,  aud,  in  tlie  room  of  the  glad  tidings  of  gTcat  joy,  it 
ad  presented  them  with  a  system  of  impostures  and  falsehoods, 
lie  atheistical  philosophers,  men  who  knew  of  the  existence  of  a 
urer  religion,  but  wlio  wished  to  bring  every  form  of  religion 
3to  the  same  condemnation,  found  the  people  in  this  condition, 
nd  determined  to  turn  it  to  their  own  destructive  aims.  It  was 
asy  to  point  out  to  the  })eoi:)le  the  trash,  which,  in  the  name  of 
?ligion,  had  been  gathering,  during  ages  of  darkness  and  igno- 
ince,  around  them;  easy  it  was  to  expose  and  hold  up  to  ridicule 
2e  absurd  doctrines,  puerile  ceremonies,  extravagant  pretensions, 
nd  oppressive  exactions  of  the  church  of  which  they  were  chil- 
ren ;  and  easy  too  it  was,  amid  the  darkness,  to  confound  Popery 
dth  Christianity,  and  make  ignorant  and  enslaved  men  believe 
;iat  the  religion  of  Christ  was  opposed  to  the  rights  of  man,  that 
)  was  tlie  wretch,  the  oppressor.  The  lamp  of  Clu'istian  truth,  as 
light  shining  in  a  dark  place,  Avas  in  the  land,  but  it  was  well- 
igh  overpowered  by  the  surrounding  obscurity.  And  men, 
aving  been  trained  to  regard  Pomanism  as  the  only  true  Chris- 
anity,  were  now  easily  i:)ersuaded  by  then'  infidel  leaders,  in 
bjuring  Pomanism,  to  reject  Christianity  itself. 
Had  the  church  of  France,  previous  to  the  revolution,  instructed 
le  people  in  the  Gospel  truth,  put  into  their  hands  the  pure 
'ord  of  God,  and  preached  the  doctrines  of  the  cross  from  her 
ulpits ;  had  she  stood  forth  before  the  eyes  of  the  nation  identi- 
ed  with  all  that  is  i^ure  and  lovely  and  of  good  report  in  Chris- 
anity;  then,  though  a  revolution  had  been  necessary,  and  infidel 
^aders  might  not  have  been  wanting,  the  body  of  the  people 
ould  have  been  kept  from  those  dreadfully  impious  excesses 
ith  which  the  revolution  was  stained.  As  it  was,  hov/ever,  the 
lir  form  of  religion  wore  a  repulsive  disguise,  lay  upon  the  neck 
f  the  nation  like  a  yoke,  had  kept  it  in  a  worse  than  Egyptian 
ondage ;  and,  the  people  being  thus  left  a  prey  to  pretending 
hilosophcrs,  were  taught  to  avenge  themselves  by  throwing  off 
le  heavy  burden,  and  trampling  everything  bearing  the  name 
f  Christianity  in  the  dust.  A  corrupt  church  left  the  people  to 
e  seduced  by  an  atheistical  philosophy;  and  the  protracted 
ffect  is  seen  at  the  present  day,  for,  amid  the  illumination  of 
le  nineteenth  century,  the  French  nation  is  nominally  Poman 


THE    COlirtUPTIONS    OF    CHEISTIANITY.  221 

Catholic,  but  at  heart  without  faith  in  the  Christian  revelation. 
This,  then,  is  one  of  the  chief  ways  in  which  a  corrupted  Chris- 
tianity ministers  to  infidelity.  It  plunges  the  people  into  super- 
stition, and  out  of  that  superstition,  at  the  call  of  the  ungodly 
leaders,  rises  the  demon  of  unbelief  Tltat  demon  is  now  stalking 
abroad  in  many  lands. 

3.  The  corruptions  of  Christianity  form  also  an  armoury  out  of 
ivMcli  infidels  take  weapons  to  attack  Christianity  itself.  Their 
own  infidelity  maybe  accounted  for  in  another  way;  but  their 
hands  are  strengthened  by  the  impostures,  al'/Surdities,  and 
oppressions,  which,  bearing  the  Christian  name,  have  converted 
that  which  is  a  blessing  into  a  curse.  A  good  cause  Avhen  de- 
praved and  made  hideous  by  professed  friends,  becomes  auxiliary 
to  its  avowed  enemies.  It  is  rarely  that  such  men  attack  Chris- 
tianity as  it  is  developed  in  the  sacred  volume,  and  exemplified  in 
the  lives  of  real  Christians,  but  as  it  has  been  misrepresented  by 
themselves,  or  as  it  exists  imbedded  in  a  mass  of  corruptions.  They 
are  wont  to  appeal  to  the  ignorance  and  superstition,  the  priest- 
craft and  crime,  existing  under  a  grossly  perverted  Christianity,  of 
which  unhappily  the  greater  part  of  church  history  is  too  full,  and 
nations  nominally  Christian  present  too  abundant  illustrations  — 
and,  with  a  dishonesty  wofully  glaring  but  often  effectual,  repre- 
sent the  evils  as  if  they  were  the  fruits  of  Christianity  itself  These 
v/ere  the  weapons  which  were  brandished  by  Paine  and  his  school; 
Holywell  Street  bristled  with  them;  and  they  are  not  unfrequently 
taken  u])  by  a  class  of  adversaries  who  would  repudiate  all  sym- 
pathy with  Paine  in  his  coarse  blasphemy  and  vulgar  impudence. 
The  grossest  darkness  and  superstition  have  existed  and  been  re- 
tained under  the  shadow  of  the  church,  the  direst  oppressions  and 
the  most  outrageous  crimes  have  been  perpetrated  in  the  Christian 
name;  and  these,  the  effects  of  a  sadly  distorted  Christianity,  are, 
with  little  ingenuity  and  less  modesty,  thrown  in  the  face  of  unde- 
filed  Christianity  itself  Men  can  distinguish  between  astrology 
and  astronomy,  between  chemistry  and  alchemy,  between  natural 
philosophy  and  magic,  and  they  never  think  of  employing  the  one 
to  fight  against  the  other.  Buttliey  have  other  interests  than  those 
of  truth  to  serve,  in  being  unwilling  to  distinguish  the  heavenly 
from  the  earthly,  —  the  religion  of  God  from  the  religion  of  man. 

Upon  the  whole,  then,  w^e  may  say,  that  it  has  often  fared  with 
Christianity,  on  account  of  its  corruptions,  as  it  has  sometimes  done 
with  the  character  of  a  great  nation,  because  of  the  degeneracy  of 
those  who  were  considered  to  reiiresent  it.  The  inhabitants  of  a 
distant  land,  who  never  saw  any  better  specimens  of  the  English 
character  than  the  drunken  ship's  crew  that  time  after  time  visited 
their  shores,  and  perpetrated  fraud,  robbery,  and  oppression,  have 
no  faith  in  the  virtue  of  the  English  nation.  They  identify  it 
with  intemperance,  deceit,  and  cruelty ;  and  look  with  jealousy  and 


)vO  IIELIGIOUS    INTOLEEAXCE. 

letestation  on  every  Avliiteman  that  sets  bis  foot  on  their  soil,  even 
hough  he  comes  to  bless  them.  The  English  in  India,  during  the 
seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  by  their  ra})ine,  impiety,  and 
icentiousness,  led  the  natives  to  regard  them  as  little  better  than 
lends  let  loose  from  hell  to  ravage  then-  coasts.  Other  joeoples 
igain,  v\dio  knovv^  full  well  that  the  depraved  class,  which  now  and 
hen  come  under  their  observation,  are  but  spurious  specimens  of 
he  true  Britons,  choose,  out  of  ill-will,  or  some  un-vorthy  motive, 
0  hold  them  up  as  types  of  England's  character.  There  is  a  time 
lational  character  which  gives  the  lie  to  the  libel,  and  there  is  a 
)ure  benignant  Christianity  which  disowns  the  corrupt  as  its  repre- 
ientative.  Nevertheless,  the  base  citizens,  in  the  eyes  of  foreigners, 
)roduce  and  strengthen  scepticism  in  regard  to  the  national 
lonour;  and,  in  like  mauner,  the  corrupt  form  of  Christianity 
^ives  occasion  for  rejecting  the  true. 


CHAPTEE  V. 

KSLIGIOUS   IXTOLEEAXCE. 

luch  intolerance  without  the  Church  —  Cliristianity  itself  stands  clear  of  all 
within  it — Its  Founder  the  most  tolerant  of  beings  —  Precepts  and  doctrines 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  the  lives  of  the  best  Christians,  acquit  the  gospel  of 
the  charge  —  Accidental  association  of  intolerance  with  the  religion  of  Christ, 
has  often  been  injurious  to  it  —  Three  manifestations  of  intolerance  noticed: — 
1st.  Jealousy  in  reference  to  science  :  — Nature  and  revelation  in  harmony  — 
Astronomy  and  the  Bible  once  set  at  variance  —  Galileo  —A  right  principle  of 
Scriptural  interpretation  harmonizes  Bible  language  with  the  true  system  of 
the  universe  —  Geology —  Great  antiquity  of  the  globe  a  result,  not  an  assump- 
tion—Perfect harmony  between  this  and  the  Mosaic  record  —  Injurious  influ- 
ence of  refusing  the  harmonizing  principle — 2nd.  Jealousy  in  reference  to  any 
departure  from  the  common  mode  of  p'ulpit  teaching — V/ant  of  Paul's  principle 
of  accommodation  in  cbnsistency  with  great  prominence  to  doctrines  of  the 
cvoss  — Necessity  of  a  wider  and'more  diversified  range —  Chalmers  s  Astrono- 
mical Discourses. —  3rd.  Intolerance  of  different  forms  and  observances  —  Much 
handled  by  infidels— Causes  disaffection  to  Christianity  in  many  intelligent 
and  liberal  minds—  Such  a  spirit  rebuked  by  Christ. 

T  should  never  be  forgotten  that  a  great  deal  of  the  intolerance  in 
tie  world  lies  vdthout  tlie  pale  of  the  church,  and  that  from  all  the 
itolerance  found  witliin  it,  Christianity  itself  is  eutirely  free. 
)ne  woidd  imagine,  to  hear  some  objectors,  that  the  thing  had  no 
xistence  except  amoug  the  adherents  of  the  Christian  system,  and 
lat  it  was  the  native  fruit  of  the  system  itself.  Some  men  see 
orruptions,  divisions,  and  intolerances,  nowhere  except  within 
10  province  of  revealed  religion ;  and  they  cannot,  or  will  not,  dis- 
^nguish  between  that  religion  and  the  abuses  that  have  crept 
round  it,  or  the  evils  clone  in  its  name.  It  is  necessary,  accord- 
igly,  to  remind  such  individuals  that  intolerance  has  had  a  place 
1  the  schools,  and  in  the  senate,  as  well  as  in  the  church ;  that 
hilosophy,  literature,  and  politics,  have  keenly  manifested  it,  as 
•ell  as  systems  of  religion;  and  that  while  the  evil  could  often  be 


TvELIGlOUS    INTOLERANCE.  22o 

shown  to  have  been  tlie  natural  effects  of  the  human  system,  it 
could  as  easily  be  shown  to  he  foreign  to  the  divine. 

The  character  of  Christianity  is  to  he  judged  of  by  the  spirit  of 
its  Founder,  by  its  precepts  and  doctrines  as  contained  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  by  the  conduct  of  tiiose  who  hare  been  acknow- 
ledged to  be  most  under  its  influence.  The  man  Christ  Jesus  — 
the  holy,  harmless,  and  undefiled  One  —  was  the  most  tolerant  of 
beings.  In  him  v/ere  harmoniously  blended  two  great  principles : 
an  uncompromising  attachment  to  the  truth,  and  great  forbearance 
toward  those  who  were  weak  in  faitli,  or  as  yet  strangers  to  its 
povrer.  He  declared  before  Pilate,  "to  this  end  was  I  born,  and 
for  this  cause  came  I  into  the  world,  that  I  should  bear  witness 
unto  the  truth."  And  so  ardent  was  his  zeal  for  the  truth,  and  so 
faithful  his  attachment  to  it,  that  men  who  take  a  one-sided  view 
of  things,  and  confound  an  enlightened  regard  to  truth  with 
intolerance,  might  indeed  bring  the  charge  against  the  Saviour 
Himself.  Had  some  persons  who  are  ever  raising  this  cry  against 
Christianity,  seen  Him,  in  holy  indignation,  expelling  the  buyers 
and  sellers  from  the  temple;  or  heard  Him  utter  such  uncompro- 
mising language  as  this, — "  he  that  is  not  with  me  is  against  me 
—  If  any  man  will  be  my  disciple,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take 
up  liis  cross  and  follow  me," — they  wou.ld,  in  all  probability,  have 
ascribed  it  to  an  intolerant  spirit.  How  libellous  would  have 
been  the  charge  !  For  we  have  only  to  behold  tlie  faithful  and  true 
witness,  v/hile  firmly  grasping  the  truth,  exemplifying  its  kindly 
spuit,  and  discountenan<^:ng  in  ]iis  followers  any  manifestations 
of  temper  inconsistent  with  it.  He  rebuked  the  various  kinds  of 
intolerance  that  were  manifested  in  his  day.  There  was  the 
intolerance  of  the  synagogue,  or  of  churcli  exclusivcness,  which 
expresses  itself  in  the  cry,  "  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of 
the  Lord,  are  we."  And  He  said  to  it,  "  I  tell  you  of  a  truth,  many 
widows  were  in  Israel  in  the  days  of  Elias,  when  the  heaven  was 
shut  up  three  years  and  six.  months,  when  great  famine  was 
throughout  all  the  land;  but  unto  none  of  them  v\'as  Elias  sent, 
save  unto  Sarepta,  a  city  of  Sidon,  unto  a  woman  that  was  a  widow. 
And  many  lepers  were  in  Israel  in  the  time  of  Eliseus  the  prophet ; 
and  none  of  them  was  cleansed,  saving  Naaman  the  Syrian." 
Tiiere  was  the  intolerance  of  a  monopolizing  caste,  the  germs  of 
v.'hich  appeared  in  his  own  partially  enlightened  disciples  who 
woidd  forbid  the  man  casting  out  demons,  because  he  did  not 
form  one  of  their  company.  And  Jesus  said,  "  forbid  him  not : 
for  he  that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us."  There  was  the  intolerance 
of  misplaced  zeal,  as  manifested  by  James  and  John,  who,  in  tlis 
times  of  their  ignorance,  would  have  commanded  fire  to  come  down 
from  heaven  and  consume  the  Samaritans,  because  they  did  not 
receive  the  ]SIaster,  But  he  turned,  and  said  unto  them,  "ye 
know  not  wliat  manner  of  spirit  ye  are  of."     Intolerance  in  Him 


224  r.ELiGious  intoleranxe. 

was  reserved  for  a  base  and  sanetimonious  livpocrisy,  and  then  it 
became  a  virtue  to  manifest  it.  But  the  bruised  reed  he  did  not 
"break,  and  the  smoking  flax  he  did  not  quench.  And,  with  an 
enlarged  heart,  he  recognised  in  every  one  who  did  the  will  of 
God,  his  mother,  his  brother,  and  his  sister.  Let  the  charge  of 
intolerance  be  made  against  whatever  religious  systems  and 
teachers  men  will ;  but  let  the  life  and  doctrine  of  Him  who 
taught  his  followers  to  love  their  enemies,  and  who  on  the  crosi? 
prayed  for  his  murderers,  stand  clear  of  it. 

Tlie  same  two  great  principles  to  which  we  have  adverted,  are 
exemplified  also  in  the  character  and  writings  of  the  apostles.  It 
is  not  to  the  time  when  they  were  beset  with  Jewish  prejudices 
that  we  refer,  but  when  they  were  in  the  very  height  of  their 
noble  career  as  Christians  and  ambassadors,  and  most  of  all  under 
the  iniluence  of  the  truth.  Look  at  John, — Boanerges,  the  son  of 
thunder, —  him  who  would  have  brought  down  lire  on  the  Sama- 
ritans. He  has  lost  none  of  his  zeal  for  the  truLh.  "  If  there  come 
any  unto  you,  and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him  not  into  your 
house,  neither  bid  him  God  speed."  But  how  deeply  is  he  imbued 
with  the  kindly  and  tolerant  spirit  of  that  truth,  "  We  know  that 
we  have  passed  from  death  to  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren." 
Look  at  Paul,  once  a  persecutor  and  injurious.  In  him  v\-erQ 
combined  uncompromising  attachment  to  great  truth,  and  for- 
bearance to  all  who  held  it,  though  differing  on  other  matters.  He 
who  withstood  Peter  to  the  face,  because  the  truth  was  likely  to 
suffer  through  his  dissimulation,  became  all  things  to  all  men  in 
order  that  he  might  win  some.  It  would  be  a  difficult  task  for 
any  man  to  find  a  single  precept  or  doctrine  in  the  apostolical 
epistles,  or  anything  in  the  conduct  of  the  apostles  themselves 
after  they  had  been  enlightened,  on  which  to  fasten  tlie  charge  of 
intolerance,  unless  he  confound  with  it  an  enlightened  attachment 
to  the  trutli  itself.  And  there  are  thousands  of  Christians,  iji 
every  age,  whose  temper  and  conduct,  being  under  the  influence 
of  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  give  the  lie  to  the  insinuation  that 
Christianity  fosters  narrow-mindedness  and  intolei'ance.  It  is  a 
petty,  unmanly,  dishonest  way  of  attacking  the  Gospel,  to  father 
upon  it  all  the  weaknesses  and  vices  of  its  professors ;  when  in 
the  character  of  its  author,  and  both  in  its  letter  and  spirit,  it 
rebukes  intolerance  of  every  shape.  Happy  is  it  tliat,  amid  the 
false  imputations  thrown  on  Christianity  by  its  enemies,  and  the 
unfavourable  representation  often  given  of  it  by  being  associated 
witli  the  imperfections  and  errors  of  its  professed  friends,  we  can 
contemplate  its  native  undiminished  grandeur  in  the  sacred  page, 
and  see  its  holy  benignant  influence  manifested  in  so  many  of  its 
true  disciples,  as  warrant  us  to  say  that  the  Gospel  has  as  much 
communion  with  intolerance  as  light  has  with  darkness. 

But,  although  the  religion  of  Christ  disowns  all  connection  with 


RELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE.  225 

the  narrowness  and  Ligotry  of  its  avowed  disciples,  it  cannot  be 
doubted  that,  in  consequence  of  such  associations,  it  has  presented 
a  repulsive  aspect  to  many  minds.  We  mean,  therefore,  to  notice 
some  of  the  forms  of  religious  intolerance,  which  have  thrown  a 
stumbling-block  in  the  way  of  a  pure  and  benignant  Christianity. 

1.  The  first,  to  which  we  advert,  is,  —  the  jealousy  villi  ivMch 
some  relujious  men  regard  the  advancement  of  science.  The  Book 
of  nature  and  the  Book  of  revelation  have  the  same  Author,  and, 
when  rightly  interpreted,  both  declare  the  glory  of  God,  and  show 
forth  his  handywork.  There  may  be  apparent  discrepancies 
between  them,  but  there  can  be  no  real  contradictions ;  and,  in 
proportion  as  scientific  research  is  prosecuted  in  the  right  spirit, 
and  true  principles  of  interpretation  are  applied  to  the  scriptural 
page,  will  the  harmony  be  manifested.  The  one,  however,  has 
often  been  arrayed  against  the  other,  to  the  injury  of  the  truth  of 
God.  We  refer,  not  so  much  to  the  vaunts  of  infidels  that  the  ago 
of  i)hilosophical  illumination  and  scientific  discovery  would  eclipse 
and  falsify  the  scriptural  revelation,  or  to  the  fact  that  some  phi- 
losophers have,  unhappily,  been  unbelievers  in  the  sacred  record 
— circumstances  which  have  had  considerable  influence  in  pre- 
judicing some  good,  though  not  great  men,  against  such  pursuits 
—  as  to  the  fact  that  Christians  themselves,  in  many  cases,  have 
countenanced  the  notion  that  there  is  real  enmity  between  them. 

It  was  once  a  dogma  both  of  philosophy  and  of  the  church, 
that  the  earth  is  the  greatest  body  in  the  universe,  placed  immove- 
able in  its  centre,  and  that  all  the  heavenly  bodies  were  created 
solely  for  its  use.  The  influence  of  Aristotle  riveted  the  notion  of 
the  earth's  immobility  on  men's  minds  for  ages,  and  the  wliole 
body  of  the  faithful  received  it  as  the  very  doctrine  of  the  Bible. 
At  length  when  the  Aristotelian  dogmas  respecting  motion  were 
overturned  by  the  discoveries  of  Copernicus,  Kepler,  and  Galileo,— 
and  the  motion  of  the  earth  round  the  sun,  as  the  centre  of  the 
planetary  system,  was,  on  demonstrable  evidence,  asserted, — 
science  and  religion  were  set  against  each  other,  and,  what  is  now 
universally  regarded  as  a  true  astronomy,  was  denounced  as  in- 
consistent witii  the  Christian  faith.  It  is  well  known  that  the 
Vatican  thundered  its  anathemas  against  those  who  held  the  Co- 
pernican  doctrine,  and  that  the  famous  Galileo  was  sent  to  the 
dungeons  of  the  Inquisition  for  thinking,  as  Milton  says,  in 
astronomy  otherwise  than  the  Franciscan  and  Dominican  licensers 
thought.  And  even  men  of  learning  and  piety  w^ere  to  be  found 
sometime  afterward  in  the  Eeformcd  Church,  who  maintained  it 
to  be  antiscriptural  to  believe  otherwise  than  that  the  earth  is  at 
rest,  and  that  the  sun  performs  a  daily  revolution  around  it. 
David,  the  man  inspired  of  God,  was  boldly  set  against  the  philo- 
sopher Galileo;  and  because  the  former  sung, "  God  hath  established 
the  earth  upon  its  foundations :  it  shall  not  be  moved  for  ever  and 

Q 


2:20  heltgious  intolehaxce. 

ever.  Tlie  going  forth  of  the  sun  is  from  the  end  of  the  heaven 
and  his  circuit  unto  the  ends  of  it,"  and  the  latter  could  not  but 
maintain,  on  tl^e  ground  of  sure  evidence,  that  the  earth  moved, — 
philosophy  was  placed  under  the  ban,  and  stigmatized  as  heretical 
and  infidel. 

The  famous  rule  of  interpretation,  so  fully  adopted  by  expositors 
in  modern  times,  that  the  sacred  writers  speak  of  natural  objects, 
according  to  the  popular  mode  of  comprehending  them,  "  ex  veri- 
tate  optica  non  physka"  as  Eosenmiiller  says, —  a  rule  which 
Galileo  himself,  who  held  both  by  the  truth  of  the  Scriptures  and 
the  truth  of  the  new  philosophy,  seems  clearly  to  have  understood 
— was  little  thought  of,  or  generally  repudiated  by  divines  as  an 
example  of  wresting  the  Scriptures  from  then-  plain  and  obvious 
meaning.  The  persecuted  philoso])her  could  have  told  them,  that 
as  the  sacred  writers,  in  accommodating  their  language  to  the 
wants  and  capacities  of  men,  speak  of  God  Himself  under  the 
•semblance  of  liuman  properties;  so  do  they,  in  speaking  of  his 
•works,  adopt  those  popular  forms  of  speech  which  could  readily 
be  comprehended. ^=  But  the  church,  intellectually,  as  v/ell  as  in 
other  respects,  was  intolerant.  The  philosophy  of  nature,  however 
clearly  established  on  fact,  must  bend  to  men's  narrow  interpre- 
*tation  of  Scripture.  It  refused  to  do  so.  The  philosoj^her,  after 
kns  humiliating  recantation,  rose  from  his  knees,  stamped  his  foot 
■on  the  ground,  and  exclaimed,  "  It  moves  after  all !"  A  perpetual 
imprisonment  was  the  penalty;  and  that  very  astronomy  which 
gives  us  such  enlarged  conceptions  of  the  God  of  nature  and  of 
gi-ace,  and  which  we  regard  as  in  perfect  harmony  with  scriptural 
truth,  had,  for  years  after  the  time  of  Galileo,  to  bear  the  brand 
of  heresy.  That  many  of  the  philosophical  minds  of  that  age 
were  strengthened  in  their  secret  opposition  to  Christianit}^  by 
such  a  course  of  intolerance,  we  may  well  believe,  when  we  con- 
sider how  much  it  is  appealed  to  by  the  enemies  of  revelation,  and 
how  a  similar,  though  less  fierce  mode  of  intolerance  affects  some 
minds  in  our  own  day. 

The  once  aj^parent  inconsistency  between  astronomy  and  reve- 
lation has  vanished ;  the  globularity  and  mobility  of  the  earth 
are  no  longer  viewed  by  the  enlightened  friends  of  Scripture  as  in 
conflict  with  its  statements ;  and  they  can  view  the  march  of  that 
sublime  science,  not  only  without  jealousy  of  any  injury  accruing 
thei-eby  to  Christianity,  but  with  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  it  con- 
tribute to  enlarge  our  conceptions  of  Him  who  is  the  Savioiu-  of 
the  world  and  the  Upholder  of  all  things.  The  application  of  a 
riglit  principle  of  scriptural  interpretation  harmonizes  the  language 
of  the  Bible  with  the  true  system  of  the  universe;  just  as  the  dis- 
coveries of  the  microscope,  evincing  as  they  do  the  care  of  the 

♦  Dr.  Smith'a  Scripture  ami  Geology,  p.  192  (4th  editiou). 


RELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE.  '^'41 

Almighty  for  the  little  as  well  as  the  great,  ward  off  the  ohjections 
wliich  iiifidelity  has  drawn  from  the  discoveries  of  the  telescope, 
on  the  ground,  that  the  magnitude  of  the  creation  is  opposed  to 
the  helief  that  our  little  eartii  has  had  concentrated  upon  it  so 
much  of  the  Divine  regards  as  is  implied  in  the  scheme  of  re- 
demption. But  if  the  elder  science  of  astronomy  has  been  cleared 
of  the  stigma  of  being  opposed  to  religion,  the  younger  science  of 
geology  has  incurred  the  reproach,  and  still  labours,  in  some 
measure,  under  it. 

Geology  has  secured  its  place  among  the  inductive  sciences ;  and, 
"  in  the  magnitude  and  sublimity  of  the  objects  of  which  it  treats, 
undoubtedly  ranks,  in  the  scale  of  the  sciences,  next  to  astro- 
nomy." *  It  is  a  fixed  principle  of  this  science, — which  extended 
observations  are  constantly  strengthening,  and  in  reference  to 
which  great  unanimity  prevails  among  geologists, — that  the  mate- 
rials of  wliich  this  globe  is  composed  are  of  a  very  high  antiquity, 
and  date  far  beyond  the  six  thousand  yeai's  which  are  the  com- 
monly assigned  age  of  the  earth.  This  is  no  mere  hypothesis. 
Physical  phenomena,  which  lie  patent  to  the  eye  of  every  observer, 
prove  that  om-  j)lanet  has  passed  through  several  different  states, 
separated  from  each  other  by  immense  intervals  of  time,  long 
before  man,  or  any  of  the  other  creatures  now  existing,  had  been 
created.  Several  miles  of  strata  upon  strata  have  been  carefull}" 
examined  by  scientific  men  of  the  first  eminence,  and  they  are 
agi'eed,  upon  ii-resistible  evidence,  in  affirming,  that  the  formation 
even  of  those  stratified  beds  wliich  are  nearest  the  surface,  must 
have  taken  periods  of  time  which  carry  us  immeasui'ably  beyond 
tlie  commonly  received  date  of  the  creation.  The  facts  that  no 
remains  of  the  human  species  have  been  found  in  any  of  the  re- 
gular geological  deposits,  that  these  deposits  bear  indubitable 
mai'ks  of  having  occupied  vast  ages  in  their  formation,  and  that 
the  temperatm-e  of  the  globe  during  the  processes  must  have  been 
such  as  that  man  could  not  then  have  existed,  prove  the  antiquity 
of  the  globe  to  be  so  great  as  that,  in  comparison,  man's  stay  upon 
it  dwindles  into  an  insignificant  point  of  time.  This  is  one  of 
the  gi-and  conclusions  of  geology,  carefully  and  legitimately  diav/n 
from  the  records  contained  in  the  bosom  of  the  earth,  and  a  con- 
clusion which  nothing  whatever  can  falsify.  "  No  geologist  worthy 
of  the  name,  says  Mr.  Hugh  Miller,  "  began  with  the  belief  of  the 
antiquity  of  the  earth,  and  then  set  himself  to  square  geological 
phenomena  with  its  requii-ements.  It  is  a  deduction,  a  result; — ■ 
not  the  starting  assumjition,  or  given  sum,  in  a  process  of  calcula- 
tion, but  its  ultimate  finding  or  answer."  f  Men  of  sceptioai 
principles  have  arrayed  this  conclusion  against  Scripture  on  the 
one  hand,  and  some  men  of  piety  have  arrayed  Scripture  against 

*  Herschell's  Discourse  on  Natural  Philosophy,  p.  287. 
+  Footpiints,  p.  265. 

q2 


228  RELIGIOUS    INIOLERAXCE. 

it  on  tlie  other.     It  is  with  the  latter  that  we  have  at  present 
to  do. 

That  there  is  an  apparent  discrepancy  hetween  the  teachings  of 
geology  and  the  teachings  of  the  Bible  in  this  case,  must  he  ad- 
mitted :  and  that  something  like  alarm  should  at  first  have  been 
produced  thereby,  in  serious  minds,  is  not  to  be  Avondered  at.  No 
truth  appears  all  at  once  full-orbed  and  complete.  Some  of  the 
noblest  ideas  of  science  and  philosophy,  that  are  now  as  the  sun 
shining  in  its  strength,  seemed,  at  their  early  daM-ning,  to  conflict 
with  cTiristianity,  because  opposed  to  some  of  the  popular  but  mis- 
taken interpretations  of  the  sacred  record.  Cowper  had  something 
like  an  excuse  in  his  day,  which  he  would  not  have  had  now,  in 
saying, 

"  Some  drill  and  bore 
The  solid  earth,  and  from  the  strata  there 
Extract  a  register,  hy  which  we  learn, 
That  he  who  made  it,  and  revealed  its  date 
To  Moses,  was  mistaken  in  its  age." 

It  is  unfortunate,  however,  that  such  jealousy  should  exist;  for 
believing,  as  such  men  must  do,  that  the  records  of  nature  and 
the  records  of  revelation  have  the  same  Author,  they  might  be 
assured  that  the  true  interpretation  of  the  one  could  never  really 
be  at  variance  with  the  true  interpretation  of  the  other.  ^  Had 
Moses,  the  man  of  God,  anywhere  asserted  that  the  materials  of 
-which  this  globe  is  composed  were  called  into  being  a  few  thou- 
sand years  ago,  had  the  inspired  historian  identified  the  original 
act  of  forming  the  world  out  of  nothing  with  the  six  days  of  the 
Adamic  creation,  science  and  revelation  would  then  have  been  at 
open  war,  and  the  consequences  would  have  been  serious.  Geolo- 
gists can  no  more  renounce  their  belief  in  the  great  antiquity 
of  the  eartli,  than  the  followers  of  Copernicus  can  give  up  the 
creed  that  the  earth  moves,  and  that  the  sun  is  in  the  centre  of  the 
planetary  system.  The  convictions  in  the  one  case,  as  well  as  in 
the  other,  are  consequents — not  antecedents.  Moses  nowhere 
asserts  that  the  chronology  is  different.  The  variance  between 
his  record  and  the  geological  evidence  is  only  apparent,  not  real; 
it  vanishes  before  a  sound  principle  of  scriptural  interpretation. 
What  we  complain  of,  however,  is,  that  some  good  men  disown 
the  harmonizing  principle,  and,  to  the  injury  of  Christianity, 
cling  doggedly  to  their  narrow  principle  of  interpretation,  and 
denounce,  as  heretical  and  infidel,  one  of  the  most  legitimate  con- 
clusions of  science.  Let  it  once  be  admitted  that  the  first  sentence 
in  the  Book  of  Genesis  stands  as  a  distinct  and  independent  pro- 
position, that  it  refers  to  an  undefined  antiquity  when  the  Al- 
mighty created  the  materials  of  the  universe  out  of  nothing,  and 
then,  as  Dr.  Chalmers  remarks,  "  we  can  allow  geology  the  am- 
plest time  for  its  various  revolutions  without  infringing  even  on 


BELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE.  ^  229 

the  litei-alities  of  the  Mosaic  record."  ■'■'  This  principle  of  inter- 
pretation is  no  novelty,  no  mere  bending  of  the  sense  of  Scripture 
so  as  to  meet  the  claims  of  a  young  science.  It  is  to  be  found  in 
many  of  the  ancient  Christian  writers,  it  was  supported  by  some 
of  the  most  learned  and  pious  men  in  more  modern  times,  but  who 
lived  before  geology  had  obtaiiied  a  place  among  the  inductive 
sciences,  and  it  is  becoming  more  and  more  generally  acceptable 
among  judicious  and  devout  expositors  of  Scripture  in  our  own  day. 
But  the  outcry  has  been  heard,  here  and  there,  from  the  pulpit  and 
the  religious  press,  that  the  geological  doctrines  are  antiscriptural. 
The  Mosaical  and  M>neral  geologies  have  been  compared  and  con- 
trasted, as  if  they  Vvere  actually  conflicting ;  and  the  most  sweeping 
charges  of  atheism  and  the  like,  have  been  made  against  a  science 
that  appeals  to  palpable  evidence  in  support  of  its  conclusion, 
that  the  earth  is  greatly  older  than  the  date  commonly  assigned  to 
it.f  It  is  but  lately  that  a  correspondent,  in  a  respectable  public  jour- 
nal said,  *'  I  hold  by  my  antiquated  tenets,  that  our  world,  nay,  the 
whole  material  universe,  was  created  about  six  or  seven  thousand 
years  ago,  and  that  in  a  state  of  physical  excellence  of  which  we 
have  in  our  present  fallen  world  only  the  '  vestiges  of  creation.'  " 
The  holders  of  such  an  opinion,  we  hope,  in  all  charity,  are  rapidly 
diminishing. 

But  who  can  estimate  the  amount  of  injury  thus  unintentionally 
done  to  the  interests  of  Christianity,  and  the  advantage  afforded 
to  the  ranks  of  infidelity.  It  unfortunately  happens  that  not  a  few 
scientific  men  have,  independently  altogether  of  such  representations, 
no  favourable  prepossessions  for  the  Christian  religion,  and  are 
criminally  strangers  to  the  strength  of  its  evidences  and  the  gran- 
deiu'  of  its  truths.  And  surely  the  intolerance  of  which  we  are 
speaking,  is  calculated  to  strengthen  their  indifference  or  hostility, 
and  to  induce  them  to  rest  in  the  conclusion  that  the  Gospel  is 
cither  a  cunningly  devised  fable,  or  a  system  inimical  to  enlightened 
and  philosophical  inquiry.  It  betrays  indeed  no  small  degree  of 
intolerance  on  the  part  of  some  philosophers  themselves,  and 
evinces  a  little-mindedness  altogether  unworthy  of  them,  that  they 
can  coolly  dismiss  Christianity  and  refuse  to  examine  its  claims, 
because  it  has  occasionally  come  before  them  associated  with  the 
weaknesses  and  prejudices  of  some  of  its  professors.  They  are 
guilty  of  acting  in  the  same  way  toward  religion. that  the  Christiam 
professors,  of  whom  they  complain,  act  toward  science;  and  th- 
charge  of  intolerance,  which  they  bring  against  others,  migh. 
justly  be  retaliated  upon  themselves.  But  this  does  in  nowise 
weaken  the  fact  that  the  attempt,  on  the  part  of  some,  to  limit  the 
Mosaic  account  of  the  creation  to  the  date  of  six  thousand  years, 
in  opposition  to  geological  conclusions  carefully  drawn  and  now 

*  Daily  Scripture  Readings,  vol.  i.  p.  1. 
+  See  Dr.  Smith's  Scripture  and  Geology,  p.  130,  &:c. 


'^'30  r.ELlGIOUS    INTOLERANCE. 

firmly  established;  and  tlie  attempt,  on  tlie  jjart  of  others,  to  put 
the  mark  of  Cain  on  the  science, — have  operated  injuriously  on 
some  minds  in  fostering  a  secret  or  open  contempt  for  Christianity. 
There  is  a  natural  indifference  in  the  human  mind  to  the  things 
which  are  revealed  of  God,  and  it  is  unfortunate  when  men  can 
lay  hold  of  some  of  the  repulsive  associations  of  Christianity  as  a 
pretext  for  disregarding  Christianity  itself,  llevelation  cannot  be 
made  to  conflict  with  reason,  Christianity  cannot  be  arrayed 
against  science,  without  provoking  enmity  on  the  other  side,  and 
giving  an  immense  advantage  to  infidelity. 

Mr.  Babbage  says,  "It  is  a  fact,  not  to  be  disputed,  that  some  of 
the  most  enlightened  minds  of  the  day,  have  nurtured  a  secret 
opposition  to  the  doctrines  of  Christianity,  owing  to  the  intellectual 
intolerance  of  its  abettors."  And  vv^hile  it  may  be  that  some  men 
of  philosophical  pursuits  are  claimiug  much  more  for  reason  than 
its  due,  or  than  it  would  be  consistent  with  the  paramount  claims 
of  Christianity  to  concede,  and  that  intolerance  may  thus  be  in- 
iiiscriminately  applied  to  old  prejudices  and  an  enlightened  zeal 
for  great  truth;  yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  any  attempt  to  inter- 
ilict  a  science  whose  conclusions  are  based  not  upon  airy  specula- 
tions, but  upon  palpable  evidence,  under  the  mistaken  notion  that 
Bucli  conclusions  are  hostile  to  the  "Word  of  God,  must  tend  to  make 
come  men  infidels,  and  furnish  with  additional  weapons  those  who 
are  so.  Let  no  tolerance  be  shown  to  the  opinion,  prevalent  in 
our  day,  that  religion  is  a  web  of  the  mind's  own  weaving,  that  it 
has  no  fixed  and  immutable  standard  in  history,  but  that  it  fluctu- 
ates vf ith  the  fluctuation  of  ages ;  for  that  were  to  act  the  pai't  of 
Judas  and  betray  the  very  truth.  But  let  the  simple  assurance 
that  the  Author  of  the  material  and  mental  constitutions,  is  also 
the  Author  of  Christianity,  for  ever  stifle  all  jealousy,  and  silence 
all  outcry  against  the  steady  march  of  physical  and  mental  science. 
Natural  religion  and  revealed  become  the  more  friendly  the  better 
they  get  acquainted,  and  the  present  as  Avell  as  past  times  can  fnr- 
uish  names  alike  illustrious  for  philosophical  acquirements  and 
Christian  excellence.  One  of  these  recently  said,  amid  an  illus- 
trious circle  of  his  scientific  compeers :  "  If  the  God  of  love  is  most 
appropriately  worshipped  in  the  Christian  temple,  the  God  of  nature 
may  be  equally  honoured  in  the  temple  of  science.  Even  from  its 
lofty  minarets,  the.jihilosopher  may  summon  the  faithful  to  prayer ; 
and  the  priest  and  the  sage  may  exchange  altars  without  the  com- 
promise of  faith  or  of  knowledge."  ^i- 

2.  The  second  form  of  religious  intolerance,  which  we  woidd 
notice,  as  having  an  unfavourable  bearing  on  Christianity,  is, — 
the  jealousy  uith  uhich  any  departure  from  the  common  mode  of 
address,  and  any  attemjrt  to  accommodate  religious  discussions  to 

*  Sir  D.  Brewster's  Address  at  the  Meeting  of  the  British  Associatiou,  at  Edin- 
burgh.  1800. 


EELIGIOCS   INTOLERANCE.  281 

the  taste,  literature,  and  philosophy  of  the  times,  are  not  unfre- 
quently  lieived  by  some  of  its  jirofessed  friends.  It  is  by  no  means 
desirable  to  make  any  material  change  in  oiu-  usually  adopted 
style  of  pulpit  preaching.  To  the  poor  the  Gospel  is  preached. 
They  form  by  far  the  larger  portion  of  almost  eveiy  religious  au- 
dience, and  to  their  intelligence  and  capacities  should  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  be  adapted.  In  order  to  secure  plainness  of  speech, 
however,  it  is  no  more  necessary  to  descend  to  vulgarity  than  to 
resort  to  raving  in  order  to  be  impressive.  Lord  Brougham,  in 
his  "  Dissertation  on  the  Eloquence  of  the  Ancients,"  says:  "The 
best  speakers  of  all  times  have  never  failed  to  find  that  they  could 
not  speak  too  well  or  too  carefully  to  a  popular  assembly  ;  that  if 
they  spoke  their  best  — the  best  they  could  address  to  the  most 
learned  and  critical  assembly,  they  were  sure  to  succeed."  Some 
of  the  most  popular  and  useful  preachers  on  both  sides  of  the 
Tweed,  are  those  whose  style  is  level  to  the  comprehension  of  the 
feeblest  of  the  ilock,  while  it  is  characterized  by  an  elegance  and 
sti'ength  wdnch  render  it  acceptable  to  the  more  refined  and  intel- 
lectual. What  is  wanting  is  a  greater  prevalency  of  what,  in  some 
quarters,  extensively  prevails, — the  style  which  blends  the  exposi- 
tory and  the  sermonizing,  the  docti'inal  and  the  practical,  the  stiff- 
ness of  the  lecture  having  imparted  to  it  something  of  the  graceful 
looseness  of  the  sermon,  and  the  declamation  of  the  sermon  re- 
ceiving some  of  the  massiveness  of  the  lecture. 

If  it  be  not  desirable  to  lay  aside  the  common  mode  of  address, 
far  less  would  it  be  to  strip  the  Gospel  of  its  pecuUarities,  or  to 
throw  them  into  the  shade,  in  order  to  remove  the  offence  of  the 
cross.  The  great  preacher  who  acted,  within  legitimate  bounds, 
on  the  principle  of  becoming  all  things  to  all  men,  acted  always 
too  on  his  noble  determination  to  know  nothing  among  men  save 
Jesus  Christ  and  Him  crucified.  The  field  of  divine  truth  is  ex- 
tensive in  itself,  and  richly  diversified  in  its  objects,  but  Christ  is 
the  sun  which  clothes  the  whole  with  light  as  with  a  garment,  and 
the  cross  is  the  seat  whence  He  sheds  abroad  the  brightness  of 
his  glory.  Over  this  wide  field  it  behoves  the  Christian  teacher  to 
conduct  his  disciples,  and  to  make  them  acquainted  with  every 
flower  and  tree  that  grows  on  its  surface;  but  all  his  lessons 
should  be  given  from  under  the  shadow  of  the  cross,  and,  on  what- 
ever subject  he  touches,  there  should  be  a  constant  reference  to 
this  as  the  tree  of  life  whose  leaves  are  for  the  healing  of  the 
nations. 

But  it  is  of  the  want  of  Paul's  principle  of  accommodation,  acted 
on  in  consistency  with  due  prominence  being  given  to  the  doctrines 
of  the  cross,  that  we  complain.  He  accommodated  himself  to  the 
prejudices  of  the  synagogue  and  of  the  market-place.  He  closed 
with  the  philosophers"  in  the  Areopagus,  and  with  the  more  un- 
leai-ned  among  the  people.     He  pursued  one  train  of  thought,  and 


2-32  KELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE. 

adopted  one  style,  while  reasonmg  with  the  Jews  ;  and  another  and 
different  one  when  addressing  the  Gentiles.  And  yet,  while  thus 
becoming  all  things  to  all  men,  he  made  it  manifest  that  he  connted 
all  things  but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the  knowledge  of  Christ. 
It  is  the  greater  prevalency  of  branching  off  from  the  cardinal  doc- 
trine of  the  Gospel,  v/hile  liolding  fast  by  it;  and  of  throwing  the 
sanctity  of  religion  over  philosophical  researches  on  the  one  hand, 
and  of  making  science  minister  to  the  illustrations  of  religious 
truth  on  the  other,  that  we  desiderate  in  much  of  our  religious 
teaching.  Tl^e  pulpit,  being  designed  for  the  instruction  of  men. 
in  every  age  in  the  things  of  God,  should  be  prepared  to  meet  the 
various  forms  of  error  whicli  are  ever  and  anon  thrown  up  from 
the  heart  of  society,  to  dissipate  the  illusions  which  have  been 
thrown  around  them,  and  to  show  how  nature.,  when  interrupted 
aright,  yields  an  unbiassed  and  spontaneous  testimony  to  revela- 
tion. Far  be  it  that  the  lessons  of  the  pulpit  should  ever  be  turned 
into  philosophical  discussions,  into  learned  disquisitions,  or  into  a 
mere  baptized  lifeless  morality.  Of  the  former  there  has  been 
more  than  enough  in  past  ages,  and  of  the  latter  there  may  be  in 
some  quarters  too  much  still.  But,  let  it  not  be  forgotten  that 
nature  teaches  many  useful  and  pious  lessons,  and  that  the  Bible 
appeals  to  them ;  that  in  the  same  record  we  are  admonished  to 
behold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world, 
and  to  consider  the  lilies  of  the  field  how  they  grow;  tliat  the  in- 
spired canon  contains  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  as  well  as  the 
Psalms  of  David,  the  philosophical  epistle  of  James  as  well  as  the 
doctrinal  epistles  of  Paul.  Let  not  God's  book  of  nature  be  treated 
as  if  its  inscriptions  had  grown  dim  and  effete  before  the  clearer 
light  of  revelation,  and,  while  ii-religious  men  would  make  the  stars 
in  their  courses  fight  against  prophets  and  apostles,  and  adduce  the 
great  "stone  book"  as  a  witness  against  the  word  of  life;  let 
those  who  are  set  to  teach  in  the  church  show  that  the  records  of 
tlie  material  creation,  of  the  heavens  above  and  of  the  earth  be- 
neath, are  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  statements  of  tlie  scriptural 
page.  There  is  the  leaven  of  a  secularist  infidelity  diffusing  itself 
among  the  masses,  and  of  a  philosophical  unbelief  making  its 
way  among  the  educated  classes,  to  the  existence  and  influence  of 
whicli,  many  who  wait  upon  the  ministrations  of  the  sanctuary  are 
not  entire  strangers ;  and  this  surely  warrants  an  occasional  de- 
partm-e  from  the  usual  mode  of  address,  in  order  to  strip  false 
systems  of  their  pretensions,  and  to  exliibit  by  contrast  the  glory 
of  the  true.  Paul,  if  we  mistake  not,  would  have  acted  thus,  had 
he  lived  in  an  age  like  ours  so  widely  different  in  many  points  from 
his  own;  and  in  doing  so,  would  have  manifested  the  harmony 
of  his  two  grand  principles  —  determining  to  know  nothing  among 
men  save  Jesus  Christ  and  Hira  crucified,  and  becoming  all  things 
ko  all  men  in  order  that  he  might  win  some. 


EELIGIOCS    INTOLERANCE.  233 

Now,  it  is  in  the  jealousy  with  which  some  devoted  teachers  of^ 
religion  view  any  such  accommodation  to  the  taste  and  prejudices 
of  the  times,  and  in  the,  perhaps,  still  stronger  jealousy  with  which 
such  an  occasional  departure  from  the  old  com-se  would  be  re 
ceived  by  multitudes  of  simple-minded  hearers,  that  we  discover 
an  inliuenee  really  injurious  to  Christianity.  We  are  not,  let  it  be 
remembered,  advocating  a  trimming  mode  of  preaching,  the  sub- 
stitution of  a  sort  of  religious  philosophy  for  the  Gospel  itself,  or 
mere  displays  of  literary  taste,  in  order  to  captivate  literary  men. 
No.  This,  besides  proving,  as  it  ever  has  done,  a  wretched 
failure,  would  be  an  abandonment  or  an  unworthy  compromise  of 
the  one  great  principle  of  Paul  to  which  we  have  adverted.  But 
it  is  the  greater  prevalency  of  the  system  which  has  been  partially 
adopted  "by  some  distinguished  teachers,  of  making  occasional 
excursions  to  other  topics,  while  habitually  expounding,  and  en- 
forcing the  gi-eat  doctrines  of  the  cross,  and  of  linking  even 
these  other  topics  with  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  for  Avhich  we 
plead.  It  is  undeniable  that  Christianity  in  the  teaching  of  by 
far  the  greater  number  of  its  devoted  ministers,  wears  a  more  con- 
tracted and  exclusive  aspect  than  really  belongs  to  it;  and  that  the 
stern  refusal  to  adapt  the  pulpit  to  the  age,  has  led  some  intelli- 
gent minds  to  cherish  unfavourable  opinions  of  the  great  truths  of 
the  Gospel.  The  jealous  exclusion  of  almost  every  topic  from 
sacred  teaching,  which  is  not  directly  included  within  the  system 
of  evangelical  doctrine,  or  the  intolerance  shown  when  an  occa- 
sional excursion  is  made  beyond  the  lorescribed  boundary,  has  in- 
duced many  to  associate  the  grand  themes  of  the  pulpit  with  a 
narrow  and  illiberal  exclusiveness  to  wliich  in  themselves  these 
themes  are  strangers.  "  If  the  priesthood  of  the  sanctuary,"  re- 
marks Dr.  Yaughan,-"  "  is  to  bo  a  match  for  the  priesthood  of 
letters,  the  path  of  its  labour  must  become  wider  and  more  diver- 
sified every  day.  Men  who  see  this  must  give  little  heed  to  those 
who  see  it  not." 

Dr.  Chalmers,  in  the  introduction  to  his  celebrated  Astronomical 
Discourses,  which  we  consider  a  good  exemplification  of  the  two 
principles  of  Paul  formerly  adverted  to,  makes  a  remark,  in  some 
measure  still  applicable.  He  is  speaking  of  "  those  narrow  and 
intolerant  professors  who  take  an  alarm  at  the  very  sound  and 
semblance  of  philosophy  ;  and  feel  as  if  there  was  an  utter  irrecon- 
cileable  antipathy  between  its  lessons  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
soundness  and  piety  of  the  Bible  on  the  other,"  and  adds,  "  it  were 
well,  I  conceive,  for  our  cause,  that  such  persons  could  become  a 
little  more  indulgent  on  this  subject;  that  they  gave  up  a  portion 
of  those  ancient  and  hereditary  prepossessions,  which  go  so  far  to 
cramp  and  enthral  them;  that  they  would  sufier  theology  to  take 

*  Letter  and  Spirit,  p.  78. 


531  RELIGIOUS    IXTOLEnANCE. 

til  at  "wide  range  of  argument  and  of  illustration  whicli  belongs  to 
her;  and  that,  less  sensitively  jealous  of  any  desecration  heing 
brought  upon  the  sabbath,  or  the  pulpit,  they  would  suffer  her 
freely  to  announce  all  those  truths  which  either  serve  to  protect 
Christianity  from  the  contempt  of  science  ;  or  to  protect  the  teachers 
of  Christianity  from  those  invasions,  which  are  practised  both  on 
the  sacredness  of  the  office,  and  on  the  solitude  of  its  devotional 
and  intellectual  labours." 

It  is  unfortunate  that  theology,  the  gi-andest  of  all  the  sciences, 
should  have  been  kept  so  much  aloof  from  the  otbers,  as  it  is 
unfortunate  that  the  others  have  been  kept  so  much  aloof  from 
theology ;  uiifortunate  it  is  that  theology  has  often  been  made  to 
look  strangely  and  jealously  on  natural  science,  as  it  is  that  natu- 
ral science  has  often  looked  strangely  and  jealously  on  theology. 
The  two  real  friends  have  been  made  to  cherish  silent  or  open 
contempt  for  each  other;  and  while  the  contempt  of  science  has 
often  occasioned  the  contemj)t  of  theologj-,  the  contempt  of  theo- 
logy has  often  occasioned  the  contempt  of  science. 

3.  The  most  common  species  of  religious  intolerance,  and  one 
that  has  given  to  Christianity  a  more  repulsive  aspect  than  any 
other,  remains  to  be  noticed — the  intolerance  of  different  forms, 
rites,  mid  ceremonies.  The  form  of  godliness,  in  the  present  state, 
is  necessary  to  the  manifestation  and  maintenance  of  its  pov\'er. 
But  men  in  every  age  have  been  prone  to  attach  that  importance 
to  the  external  shape  which  only  belongs  to  the  inner  life.  And 
in  proportion  to  the  exclusiveness  of  attachment  to  any  particular 
form,  has  been  the  intolerance  shown  to  those  who  differ  fi-om  it. 
Christianity  is  the  ministration  of  the  spirit.  Its  divine  Founder 
frowned  ujion  the  formalism  and  consequent  intolerance  of  his 
day.  Tlie  New  Testament,  while  giving  no  coimtenauce  to  the 
neglect  of  the  outward  institutions  of  religion,  places  them  in 
complete  subordination  to  piety  itself ;  and,  "by  the  utter  absence 
of  minute  regulations  as  to  external  ceremonies,  indicates  not  only 
that  they  are  of  inferior  importance  compared  with  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law,  but  that  professing  Christians  should  sho\T 
much  indulgence  towards  one  another  in  reference  to  them.  The 
several  sections  of  the  church  have  often  acted  as  if  the  New  Tes- 
tament had  its  book  of  Leviticus,  and  their  individual  interpretation 
could  not  possibly  be  otherwise  than  the  right  one ;  and  as  if  they 
had  been  commanded  to  punish  or  stand  aloof  from  those  who 
denied  there  was  any  such  book  in  the  New  Testament,  or  who 
ventured  to  adopt  another  interj)retation  of  its  meaning.  From 
the  beginning  until  now,  some  men,  pent  np  within  their  own 
sacred  enclosure,  and  being  unable  to  see  any  good  beyond,  have 
been  crying,  "  the  temple  of  the  Lord,  the  temple  of  the  Lord  are 
we."  Their  own  Zion  has  filled  up  so  largely  the  sphere  of  their 
vision  as  to  be  looked  upon  as  exclusively  the  church,  and  they 


EELIGIOUS    INTOLERANCE.  235 

say,  with  an  imj^lied  dispai-agement  of  all  other  liills,  "  our  fathers 
worshipped  in  this  mountain."  The  line  of  genealogy — the  chain 
of  succession — has  become  so  exclusively  sacred  in  their  estima- 
tion as  the  channel  of  grace,  as  to  have  blinded  their  eyes  to  an 
illustrious  ancestral  piety  elsewhere,  and  to  lead  them  to  say  with 
ineffable  complacency,  "  we  have  Abraham  to  our  father."  And 
while  intolerance  has  been  manifesting  itself  in  this  way,  under  a 
pretended  zeal  for  the  honour  of  Christianity  itself,  that  veiy 
Christianity,  in  the  life  of  its  great  Author,  and  in  the  pages  of 
inspiration,  has  been  rebuking  the  foul  and  wicked  spirit,  and 
calling  upon  it  to  come  out  of  the  church. 

Men  who  have  no  inclination  to  examine  the  evidences  of 
Christianity,  and  to  contemplate  its  native  grandeur  disconnected 
from  the  weakness  and  intolerance  of  its  professed  friends,  confound 
the  one  Avith  the  other.  Or  they  are  something  like  individuals 
prevented  from  entering  into  a  magnificent  castle,  and  surveying 
its  beautiful  grounds,  by  the  surly  looks  of  the  porters  that  stand 
at  the  gate.  This  intolerance,  like  an  evil  genius,  has  so  often 
accompanied  Clnistianity  in  its  descent  down  the  stream  of  ages, 
and  in  its  progi*ess  through  the  world,  leading  to  the  formation  of 
conventicle  acts  and  acts  of  uniformity,  unchurching,  anathema- 
tizing, imprisoning,  and  burning  those  who  were  of  a  different 
way,  that  it  would  not  be  wonderful  were  thousands  to  rise  up  in 
judgment,  and  say  to  the  demon  of  intolerance,  "  You  made  us 
infidels."  Vast  multitudes,  in  every  age,  will,  in  spite  of  all 
remonstrance,  estimate  Christianity  by  the  spirit  and  conduct  of 
its  professed  followers.  And,  while  they  see  much  in  the  past, 
and  not  a  little  in  the  present,  of  that  temper  which,  under  the 
plea  of  religion,  would  bring  down  fire  from  heaven  and  consume 
the  Samaritans ;  or  which  manifests  itself  in  a  conceited  piety, 
saying,  "  Stand  by  yourself,  come  not  near  to  me,  for  I  am  holier 
than  you;"  their  prejudices  against  Christianity  will  strengthen, 
and  they  will  be  apt  to  confound  the  darkness  and  the  light.  No 
one,  at  all  acquainted  with  the  writings  of  infidels,  more  especially 
with  those  which  have  been  popularized  and  diffused  through  the 
masses,  but  must  know  that  this  species  of  religious  intolerance  is 
handled  and  held  up  as  if  it  were  the  natm-al  fruit  of  religion 
itself.  And  how  often,  in  the  walks  of  social  iutercourse,  do  we 
meet  with  intelligent  and  liberal-minded  men,  who  cannot  conceal 
then  disaffection  to  Christianity,  on  account  of  what  may  be  called 
the  churcli  intolerance  of  many  of  its  professors. 

Coleridge  has  said,  "  I  will  be  tolerant  of  every  thiug  else,  but 
Dvery  other  man's  intolerance."  Religious  intolerance  is  the  most 
odious  and  insufferable  of  all.  The  spirit  of  humanity,  if  it  be  not 
enslaved,  rises  up  against  it ;  and  on  many  minds  who  have  not 
learned  to  distinguish  between  the  gentleness  of  Christ  and  the 
bitterness  of  some  professing  Christians,  such  is  its  influence  as  to 


236  RELIGIOUS  intolerancp:, 

involve  in  one  feeling  of  disgust  eveiy  thing  in  the  shape  and 
nanie  of  Christianity.  "What  an  inconceivably  paltry,  troublesome, 
intolerant  thing,  must  Christianity  be  in  the  eyes  of  some  men- 
who  form  their  notions  of  it  from  some  portions  of  Church  His, 
tory,  or  from  those  who  stickle  for  caste,  vestments,  and  cere- 
monies, as  if  the  life  of  genuine  religion  was  bound  up  in  them. 
x\nd  so  much  fiery  zeal  has  been  manifested,  by  large  bodies  of 
professing  Christians  in  every  age,  for  the  mere  wood,  hay,  and 
stubble,  that  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at,  if  those  who  were  indis- 
posed to  appeal  to  the  Bible,  should  have  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  there  was  nothing  else  in  religion  worth  contending  for. 
The  Church  in  every  age  has  had  its  Hamans  who  could  not  bear 
to  see  Mordecai  sitting  at  tlie  gate.  There  have  been  multitudes 
of  great  and  petty  Lauds  who  would  rather  have  had  the  plague  in 
their  parishes  than  religious  dissent,  and  who  would  sooner  have 
tolerated  drunkenness  and  uncleanness  than  the  unpardonable  sin 
of  Puritanism  and  Nonconformity.  The  imprisonment  of  a  John 
Bunyan  and  thousands  of  men  of  less  note,  because  they  would 
pray  without  a  common  prayer-book ;  the  outrage  of  refusing 
Christian  burial  to  men  who  had  not  been  baptized  within  the 
pale  of  a  particular  communion;  the  denial  of  the  validity  of  any 
ordination  but  this  particular  one  or  that  particular  one:  the  jea- 
lousy sometimes  shown  toward  lay  preaching,  not  lest  error  should 
be  propagated,  but  lest  the  priest's  office  should  be  invaded ;  and 
the  many  ways  in  which  the  old  j^roposition  is  openly  expressed, 
or  half-concealed,  "  out  of  our  church,  no  salvation  ;"  these,  which 
are  but  the  intolerancies  of  erring,  deluded,  or  proud  men,  have 
done  incalculable  injuries  to  that  benignant  work  which  is  of 
God.  "  The  prevalence  of  so  intolerant  a  theory,"  says  Isaac 
Taylor,  when  spealdngof  Tractarianism,  "  and  the  bold  avowal  of 
it  by  those  who  are  regarded  as  the  best  informed  expounders  of 
Christianity,  silently  but  extensively  operates  to  drive  cultured 
and  ingenuous  minds  into  deism  or  atheism.  What  is  this 
Christianity,  say  such,  which,  while  professing  to  be  a  religion, 
not  of  bondage  and  forms,  but  of  truth  and  love,  nevertheless  im- 
pels its  adherents  to  violate  all  charity  on  the  precarious  ground 
of  an  elaborate  hypothesis  !  "* 

The  disciples  may  forbid  a  man  to  cast  out  demons  in  the 
name  of  Jesus,  because  he  follows  not  with  them.  But  the 
Lord,  instead  of  sanctioning  their  conduct  rebukes  them.  It 
is  enough  for  Him  that  the  man  is  doing  his  work,  and  doing  it  in 
liis  name.  "  Such  a  church,  or  such  a  community,"  says  Vinet, 
"  believes  that  to  follow  Jesus  Christ,  it  is  necessary  to  be  with  it 
form  a  part  of  its  organization,  join  the  society  of  which  it  is  com 
posed,  espouse  its  interests,  and  hang  out  its  banner."!;    The  Loixi 

*  Spiritual  Christianity,  p.  99.  +  Vinet' s  Vital  Christianity,  p.  223. 


BIStTNIOX    OF   THE    CHUECII.  237 

rebukes  sucli  a  spirit.  He  looks  over  all  the  hedge-work  of  forms 
and  ceremonies  witliin  which  his  professed  followers  have  too  often 
enclosed  themselves,  and  says,  "he  that  is  not  against  us  is  for 
us."  Let  not  Christianity,  then,  be  made  responsible  for  what  it 
repudiates;  but  let  it  not  be  denied  that  an  intolerance  of  different 
external  forms  and  rites,  on  the  part  of  churches,  has  been  preju- 
dicial to  the  Gospel  and  strengthening  to  infidelity. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

DISUNION    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Christ's  Church  really  one — Scriptural  illustrations  of  this — A  truth  often  lost 
sight  of — Disjointed  state  of  tlie  Church  a  common  refuge  of  infidelity — An 
argument  easily  applied — Its  influence  on  a  man  whose  religious  knowledge  is 
merely  superficial,  and  who  has  but  a  very  lingering  attachment  to  ChriPtiauity 
— The" sophism  repelled  by  aman  of  an  opposite  character — The  refuge,  however, 
remains — Deistical  writers  used  it — A  source  of  pei-plexity  to  the  weak  and 
inqttiring,  and  an  auxilini-y  to  the  hostile — Remark  of  Robert  Hall — Unity  not 
to  he  confounded  with  uniformity — Romish  unity  a  huge  fiction— Remark  of 
Whately — Scriptural  tinity  consistent  with  minor  differences — Remark  of  Sir 
James  Stephen — Mr.  Ruskin's  "  Notes" — Difi"ereuce  between  moral  and  mathe- 
matical certainty — Voltaire — JNIacaulay's  remarks  on  Gladstone — A^isible  unani- 
mity to  be  aimed  at — Saviour's  Prayer — Twofold  influence  of  Christian  unity 
— The  exhibition  of  unity  would  tell  mightily  as  a  proof  of  the  divinity  of 
Christianity — Instanced  in  the  early  Church — The  consequent  unity  of  action 
would  tell  powerfully  on  successful  propagation  of  Christianity — Primitive 
Church  had  unity  of  action  so  long  as  it  had  unity  of  exhibition — Noble  things 
done  since  by  combined  Christian  effort — God,  in  the  signs  of  the  times,  is 
calling  upon  Christians  to  manifest  their  unity. 

The  Church  of  Christ,  amid  all  outward  diversities  and  conflicting 
interests,  is  really  one.  AVhat  Cyprian,  one  of  the  most  illustrious 
of  the  Fathers,  said,  with  a  too  partial,  if  not  an  exclusive  refer- 
ence, to  the  existing  church,  is  true  of  the  great  company  of  the 
faithful,  composed  of  men  in  all  ages  and  lands,  who  hold  the 
Head,  even  Christ : — "  The  church  is  one,  wliich,  by  reason  of  its 
fecundity,  is  extended  into  a  multitude,  in  the  same  manner  as 
the  rays  of  the  sun,  however  numerous,  constitute  but  one  light; 
and  the  branches  of  a  tree,  however  many,  are  attached  to  one 
trunk,  which  is  supported  by  its  tenacious  root;  and  when  various 
rivers  flow  from  the  same  fountain,  though  number  is  difiiised  by 
the  redundant  supply  of  waters,  unity  is  preserved  in  their  origin."  =:' 
This  essential  characteristic  of  the  Christian  community  is  illus- 
trated by  several  comparisons  in  Scripture.  The  church  is  repre- 
sented as  a  building  of  which  the  Lord  Jesus  is  the  foundation, 
and  believers  in  every  place  and  age  are  living  stones  united  to 
Him  and  to  each  other,  and  built  up  a  spiritual  house.  It  is 
spoken  of  as  one  fold  under  the  care  of  the  one  shepherd,  as  a 
whole  family  or  brotherhood  named  after  the  Father  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and,  not  to  multiply  illustrations,  it  is  described  as 

*  Hall's  Terms  of  Communion. 


one  body,  all  genuine  believers  holding  the  same  Head,  and  everj 
one  members  one  of  another.  Yet  the  clmrch,  in  many  of  its 
branches,  has  often  lost  sight  of  this  dehghtful  truth,  and  acted  a 
part  directly  contrary  to  its  influence.  The  harmony  has  been 
broken,  brethren  hare  set  brethren  at  nought,  scliisms  have  been 
made  in  the  body,  and  member  has  been  saying  unto  member,  "I 
have  no  need  of  thee."  The  faithful  have  been  ranging  themselves 
under  different  leaders,  some  saying  we  are  of  Paul,  others,  we  are 
of  Apollos,  others,  we  are  of  Cephas ;  while  their  common  Lord 
and  Savioiu'  has  been  saying  unto  them,  "  One  is  yoiu'  Master, 
even  Christ,  and  all  ye  are  brethren." 

The  disjointed  and  disorderly  state  of  the  church  has  been  no- 
toriously one  of  the  most  common  refuges  of  infidelity.  At  the 
beginning,  the  lovely  manifestation  of  its  inward  unity  often  drew 
tlie  unwilhng  homage  from  the  world,  "  Behold  how" these  Chris- 
tians love  one  another!"  And  we  may  easily  conceive  how  in- 
fluential must  have  been  the  exhibition  of  Christian  unity  in 
disarming  the  prejudices  and  overcoming  the  hostility  of  those 
without.  To  see  vast  multitudes  of  individuals,  men  of  every 
kindred  and  tongue,  and  nation  and  people,  separated  from  each 
other  by  country  and  language,  by  a  diversity  of  station  and  in- 
terests, all  glorying  in  the  same  cross,  bound  by  the  bands  of  love 
into  one  Christian  brotherhood,  and  harmoniously  engaged  in 
doing  the  greatest  good  to  the  world,  must,  in  many  cases,  have 
been  instrumental  in  producing  the  conviction  that  Christianity  is 
of  God.  "  It  was  this,  indeed,"  remarks  Neander,  "which,  in  a 
cold  and  selfish  age,  struck  the  pagans  with  wonder."  But  the 
picture  has  been  reversed.  Modern  Christendom  has  too  often 
presented  the  unseemly  spectacle  of  the  several  companies  of  the 
Prince  of  Peace  contending  against  each  other,  instead  of  uniting 
their  strength  and  advancing  against  the  common  foe.  The  un- 
believing world  has  meanwhile  looked  on,  and  said  with  a  more 
deeply  rooted  prejudice,  "  See  how  these  Christians  are  divided, 
how  they  hate  and  oppose  each  other.  This  is  your  boasted 
Clu-istianity,  and  these  are  the  followers  of  Him  whom  they  call 
meek  and  lowly  of  heart ! " 

Tlie  argument  against  the  Gospel,  derived  from  the  divisions 
and  discords  of  the  Christian  community,  is  a  very  popular  one. 
It  lies  upon  the  surface  of  things,  requiring  no  great  grasp  of  com- 
prehension either  on  the  part  of  him  who  takes  it  up  and  applies 
it,  or  on  the  part  of  him  who  receives  it  There  are  multitudes, 
whose  natural  aversion  ^o  Christianity  would  fail  to  manifest  itself 
openly  under  the  pressure  of  abstract  reasoning,  who  will  be 
drawn  out  to  an  avowed  unbelief,  by  the  use  of  popular  sophisms, 
and  an  appeal  to  those  palpable  facts  which  are  unhappily  fur- 
nished by  the  divided  state  of  the  Clmstian  world.  Disunion 
among  the  adherents  of  any  system  is  a  weapon  put  into  the  hands 


DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH.  230 

of  opiioneuts,  which  they  readily  point  against  the  system  itself. 
And  the  weapon  flies  the  swifter  toward  the  mark,  according  as 
the  pretensions  of  the  system  and  the  conduct  of  its  professors  are 
at  variance.  With  what  a  degree  of  self-elation,  then,  must  many 
an  infidel,  who  had  neither  the  honesty  nor  the  inclination  to 
examine  Christianity,  have  looked  upon  the  sectarianism  and  con- 
tention of  the  chm-ch.  And  how  impregnable  must  he  have  felt 
his  position,  when  encountering  a  man  somewhat  like-minded  with 
himself,  only  retaining  the  shadow  of  a  hereditary  reverence  for 
Christianity,  but  as  little  disposed  to  imitate  tlie  noble  Bereans  in 
searching  the  Scriptures  to  see  whether  or  not  these  things  are  so. 
He  would  have  at  hand  a  number  of  texts  in  which  the  character 
and  pretensions  of  the  Gospel  are  expressed  or  implied,  and,  with 
«t  view  of  falsifying  these,  he  would  appeal  to  the  temper  and  con- 
duct of  the  adherents  of  the  Gospel,  place  the  one  in  conflict  with 
the  other  ;  and,  as  if  it  were  indisputable  that  tlie  temper  was  the 
genuine  influence  of  Christianity,  endeavour  to  fix  upon  the  sys- 
tem the  brand  of  imposture.  He  would  need  only  to  lay  hold  of 
the  song,  so  descriptive  of  the  Gospel,  which  was  sung  by  the 
angels  over  the  plains  of  Bethlehem,  and  then  making  his  appeal  to 
the  history  of  the  church,  and  to  the  actual  state  of  some  portions 
of  the  Christian  world,  complacently  ask,  *'  Where  is  glory  to 
God  in  the  highest,  and  on  earth  peace,  good  will  toward  men?" 
The  appeal  would  not  be  without  its  influence  on  the  mind  of  a 
man  who  had  no  experimental  knowledge  of  the  peaceful  tendency 
of  the  Gospel,  whose  acquaintance  with  the  state  of  the  Christian 
world  was  of  the  most  superficial  character,  and  whose  lingering 
attachment  to  Christianity  was  like  the  last  sere  leaf  on  a  tree 
ready  to  be  carried  off  by  the  next  wind  that  blew. 

An  individual  whose  acquaintance  with  Christian  truth  was 
enlightened,  deep,  and  experimental,  and  whose  knowledge  of  the 
Christian  community  extended  to  other  facts  than  external  divi- 
sions and  imperfections,  could  withstand  the  appeal  and  repel  the 
sophism.  He  could  say  to  the  infidel  pleader,  These  are  not  all 
the  facts  of  the  case.  Your  ai-gument  is  a  one-sided  one.  You 
have  gone  to  the  bleak  and  wintry  side  of  the  hill,  and  have  come 
away  with  the  notion  that  all  around  is  gloomy  and  sterile,  wliereas 
the  other  slope  is  clothed  to  the  top  with  verdm-e,  and  on  it  the  sun 
is  brightly  shining.  You  have  raked  up  the  divisions  and  conten- 
tions of  the  church,  but  you  have  not  told  us  of  the  times  of  her 
unity  and  valiant  contendings  for  the  truth.  And  not  only  so,  but 
you  have  confounded  the  corruptions  of  Christianity  with  Chris- 
tianity itself,  the  accidental  with  the  essential,  the  work  of  man 
with  the  work  of  God.  The  divisions,  of  which  you  make  so 
much,  are  to  be  deplored,  but  they  are  not  unforeseen  obstacles 
thwai-ting  the  march  of  Christianity ;  on  the  contrary,  the  Christian 
\ecord  foretold  them,   Christianity  itself  overcomes  them,   and 


210  DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

eventually  makes  them  swell  the  train  of  her  trunnph.  The 
church,  amid  all  outward  diversities,  is  verily  one ;  and  when  the 
storms  have  been  hushed,  and  the  dark  clouds  have  passed  away, 
the  world  will  see  the  true  vine,  and,  clustering  on  eitlier  side  of  it 
—  united  by  a  common  bond,  pervaded  by  a  common  principle  of 
life,  and  bearing  the  same  manner  of  fruits  —  a  goodly  array  of 
living  branches. 

But  this  mode  of  stating  the  case,  however  just  and  true,  and 
whatever  might  be  its  weight  on  the  mind  of  an  anxious  inquirer, 
would  not  prevail  with  the  man  whose  tendencies  were  in  an  op- 
posite direction.  There  is  the  palpable  ftct  of  a  disjointed  and 
divided  church  standing  before  liim,  there  are  schisms  in  the  king- 
dom that  is  declared  to  be  one,  there  is  the  sound  of  discordant 
voices  and  conflicting  interests  among  the  followers  of  the  Prince 
of  Peace.  And  so  long  as  these  excrescences  of  the  religious  life 
are  manifested,  and  men  are  to  be  found  who  will  persist  in  form- 
ing their  notions  of  Clmstianity,  not  from  the  New  Testament, 
but  from  the  imperfections  and  inconsistencies  of  its  followers,  so 
long  will  inditference  and  infidelity  have  a  refuge  in  the  secta- 
rianism and  contentions  of  the  Christian  world.  We  may  get 
behind  the  refuge  and  endeavour  to  push  the  man  from  it,  we  may 
tell  him  that  he  has  mistaken  a  mud  shed  for  a  strong  tower,  we 
may  cry  out  against  his  unfairness  and  little-mindedness  in  con- 
founding what  is  accidental  with  what  is  essential,  and  in  suffering 
himself  to  be  prejudiced  against  a  revelation  from  heaven  because 
of  the  coutendings  of  its  professed  friends.  We  may  carry  the 
point  farther,  and  charge  his  hostility,  as  the  Saviour  himself  has 
done,  on  a  deep-rooted  aversion  of  mind  and  heart  to  the  high  and 
holy  principles,  the  strict  and  uncompromising  requirements  of  the 
Gospel  itself.  But,  after  having  done  all  this,  the  refuge,  such  as 
it  is,  remains ;  and  the  man  still  resorts  to  it  in  the  way  of  justifying 
and  confirming  his  aversion  to  the  Gospel  truth.  We  might  be 
almost  sure  too,  that,  in  the  case  of  many,  were  this  refuge  taken 
away,  others  would  be  resorted  to,  and  their  prejudices  against 
Christianity  be  not  a  wliit  lessened.  But  this  does  not  affect  the 
fact,  that  the  visible  disunion  of  the  Christian  church  has  been  a 
stumbling-block  to  the  world,  and  had  strengthened  the  hands  of 
the  infidel. 

The  deistical  wi'iters,  from  Lord  Herbert  downwards,  liave 
availed  themselves,  with  much  disingenuousness  indeed,  of  this 
weapon  against  the  Christian  cause;  and  have  fallaciously,  yet 
witli  some  plausibility,  argued,  that  a  system  which  admitted  of 
such  conflicting  opinions  among  its  adherents,  could  possess 
nothing  like  certainty  ;  and  that  a  church  professedly  one  and  yet 
split  into  a  number  of  isolated  or  opposing  sects,  must  be  a  con- 
tradiction. Herbert,  Bolingbroke,  and  other  writers  of  a  lower 
grade  in  the  same  school,  may  have  become  unbelievers,  inde- 


DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH.  241 

pendent  altogether  of  tlie  subordinate  cause  wliich  we  are  nov; 
considering,  and  might  have  retained  their  unbelief  had  that  cause 
been  removed  out  of  the  way ;  but  it  was  among  the  auxiliaries  that 
strengthened  their  prejudices  against  Christianity,  furnished  them 
with  weapons  of  attack,  and  gave  then-  infidel  sentiments  a  readier 
access  into  the  minds  of  other  men.  The  world  has,  in  these  con- 
flicting sects  and  divisions,  a  hold  which  it  had  not  in  the  primi- 
tive age  of  Christianity  ;  and,  without  assigning  to  the  unity  of  the 
chinch  that  efficiency  as  a  cause  which  some  (with  a  view  of  pre- 
cluding a  higher  agency)  have  dojie,  *  we  cannot  doubt  that  its 
visible  unity,  short  though  its  continuance  was,  had  a  strong  sub- 
ordinate influence  in  recommending  the  Christian  cause,  any  more 
than  we  can  doubt  that  the  return  of  peace  and  unity  will  be 
powerfully  instrumental  in  the  conversions  of  the  latter  day 
'"  Nothing,"  says  Lord  Bacon,  "  doth  so  much  keep  men  out  of  the 
church,  and  drive  men  out  of  the  church,  as  breach  of  unity."  And, 
as  Isaac  Taylor  remarks, "  if  we  could  only  bring  to  view  the  secret 
causes  of  that  infidelity  wliich,  it  is  to  be  feared,  prevails  among 
the  educated  classes,  this  now  named — the  scandal  arising  from 
religious  dissensions  would  probably  appear  to  be  one  of  the  most 
frequent  and  determmative."f 

The  most  povferful  arguments  in  favour  of  Christianity  have 
been  repelled  and  thrown  upon  its  advocates  by  the  infidel  sarcasm, 
'' AgTee  among  yourselves  first;  and  then,  manifesting  yourselves, 
what  you  profess  to  be,  the  disciples  of  one  Master,  come  and  ask 
lis  to  join  you."  And  it  has  been  felt,  when  advocating  the  Chris- 
tian cause  before  those  who  are  indifferent  or  opposed  to  it,  that 
liowever  shallow  the  sophisms  by  which  they  endeavom  to  defend 
their  hostility,  and  however  much  that  hostility  is  to  be  traced  to 
an  ulterior  and  more  powerful  cause,  a  stumbling-block,  an  occa- 
sion of  offence,  would  be  destroyed,  were  the  breaches  in  Zion 
healed;  and  the  church  would  then  look  forth  "  as  the  morning," 
on  a  world  destined  to  be  her  inheritance,  "  fan-  as  the  moon,  clear 
as  the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an  army  with  banners."  The  divisions 
and  conflicting  opinions  of  the  Christian  world  have  been  a  source 
of  painful  perplexity  to  the  weak  and  inquiring  on  the  one  hand, 
andhave  operated  as  a  flattering  unction  to  the  indifferent,  and  an 
auxiliary  force  to  the  decidedly  hostile  on  the  other.  Some  of  the 
former,  with  great  want  of  manliness,  have  sought  refuge  from  the 
embarrassment  in  tlie  infallibility  and  uniformity  of  Home ;  thus 
renouncing  the  right  of  private  judgment,  after  having  exercised  it 
in  choosing  their  new  mother,  and  rolling  their  responsibility  ever, 
afterwards  upon  the  back  of  a  self-styled  infallibihty ;  wliile  the- 
latter,  seeing  division  to  be  the  weakness  of  the  chm'ch,  have,  with 
much  unfairness,  ascribed  it  to  the  weakness  of  Christianity  itself. 

*  Gibbon.  +  Spiritual  Christianity,  p.  149. 


24S  DISUNION    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

Eobeit  Hall,  in  allusion  to  the  controversies  and  factions  which 
distracted  the  church  subsequent  to  the  Reformation,  arising  out 
of  the  abuse  of  the  right  of  private  judgment  then  nobly  vindicated, 
says,  "in  this  disjointed  and  disordered  state  of  the  Christian 
church,  they  who  never  looked  into  the  interior  of  Christianity 
were  apt  to  suspect,  that  to  a  subject  so  fruitful  in  particular  dis- 
putes must  attach  a  general  uncertainty ;  and  that  a  religion 
founded  on  revelation  could  never  have  occasioned  such  discord- 
ancy of  principle  and  practice  among  its  disciples.  Thus  infidelity 
is  tlie  joint  offspring  of  an  irreligious  temper  and  unholy  specu- 
lation, employed,  not  in  examining  the  evidences  of  Christianity, 
but  in  detecting  the  vices  and  imperfections  of  professing 
Christians."=:< 

Unity  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  uniformity.  The  distinction 
between  the  two,  however,  has  often  been  lost  sight  of  both  by  the 
enemies  and  friends  of  Christianity.  The  church  has  had  many 
an  extensive  scheme  of  uniformity,  while  within  it  there  has  been 
anything  but  unity.  Popery  glories  in  her  undivided  empire,  but 
it  is  only  the  oneness  of  an  external  ceremonial,  which  shelters 
men  of  no  opinions  about  religion  and  men  of  almost  every  diversity 
of  opinion.  It  is  the  unity  of  millions  yielding  an  external 
homage  to  one  man,  and  scrupulously  observing  the  same  outward 
ceremonies,  while  between  multitudes  of  them  there  are  few  or  no 
other  points  of  contact.  It  is  a  huge  fiction  to  maintain  that 
Rome  is,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  expression,  an  united  cliurch, 
while  within  the  uniform  pale  are  aU.  kinds  of  doctrines  from 
supralapsarianism  to  atheism.  "  It  is  not  true,"'  remarks  Arch- 
bishop Whately,  "  that  the  church  of  Rome  is,  even  in  their  own 
sense  of  the  word,  exempt  from  divisions  and  dissensions.  The 
great  means  of  unity,  according  to  most  of  them,  is  the  authority 
of  the  pope ;  yet  they  are  not  agreed  among  themselves  about  the 
extent  of  the  pope's  authority ;  some  thinking  the  pope  infallible, 
others  denying  that  he  is;  some  making  him  superior  to  a  general 
council,  others  inferior,  etc.  Nay,  learned  men  have  reckoned  up 
at  least  tvv'enty-four  fierce  schisms  and  dissensions  (some  of  them 
very  blood}')  about,  uho  was  pope;  when  several  rivals  each 
claimed  to  be  the  true  pope,  and  condemned  all  others  as  impostors. 
Again,  they  are  divided  among  themselves  about  many  of  the  same 
things  as  Protestants  are  divided  about;  as  fi-ee  will,  predestina- 
tion, etc. ;  besides  many  disputes  which  have  no  place  among  us."]- 

Protestantism,  too,  in  aj^ing  the  imposing  system  of  Rome,  has 
had  its  schemes  of  uniformity,  but  these  schemes  have  failed  of 
exhibiting  Christian  unity.  The  unity  for  which  the  Saviour 
prayed  was  a  oneness  of  heart  and  soul  among  his  people — mani- 
fested in  loving  each  other,  in  seeking  the  salvation  of  men,  and 

*  Modem  Infidelity,  +  Cautions  for  the  Times,  p.  28. 


DISUNION    Of    THE    CHURCH.  243 

in  promoting  the  extension  of  liis  kingdom.  This  unity  is  per- 
fectly consistent  with  minor  differences.  It  is  not  necessary  to  its 
exhibition,  and  in  order  to  secm'e  its  good  results,  that  all  he 
bound  up  in  one  and  tlie  same  system  of  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion.-:<  This  we  regard  as  altogether  Utopian.  On  such  points,  for 
example,  as  church  government,  and  the  subjects  of  baptism,  Scrip- 
ture is  not  so  full  and  explicit,  as  to  preclude  diversity  of  sentiment 
among  sincerely  good  men.  And  the  grand  reason,  we  doubt  not, 
is,  that  the  disciples  of  Christ  may  be  taught  to  forbear  one 
another  in  love.  Uniformity  is  never  enjoined  in  Scripture,  but 
unity,  times  and  ways  without  number,  is.  It  is  according  as 
Christians  have  already  attained,  that  they  are  to  walk  by  the 
same  rule  and  to  mind  the  same  thing.  Besides,  who  does  not 
see  that  the  unanimity  of  the  church  would  be  more  strikingly 
manifested,  and  present  a  more  persuasive  spectacle  to  the  world, 
did  it  exist  along  with  minor  diversities,  than  under  a  smoothly- 
shaven  system  of  uniformity  ?  In  the  latter  case,  there  might  be 
a  danger  of  ecclesiastical  despotism,  which  would  excite  the 
jealousy  of  the  world;  in  the  former  case,  there  would  be  the 
working  of  a  powerful  common  principle,  making  it  manifest  that 
the  religion  which  produced  such  benignant  harmony  amid  such 
diversity,  must  be  not  of  man  but  of  God.  "  There  is,"  says  Sir 
James  Stephen,  "  an  essential  unity  in  that '  Kingdom  which  is  not 
of  tliis  world.'  But  within  the  provinces  of  that  mighty  state  there 
is  room  for  endless  varieties  of  administration,  and  for  local  laws 
and  customs  widely  differing  from  each  other.  The  unity  consists 
in  the  one  object  of  worship  —  the  one  object  of  affiance — the  ono 
source  of  virtue — the  one  cementing  principle  of  mutual  love, 
which  pervade  and  animate  the  whole.  The  diversities  are,  and 
must  be,  as  numerous  and  intractable  as  are  the  essential  dis- 
tinctions which  nature,  habit,  and  circumstances  have  created 
among  men.     Uniformity  of  creeds,  of  discipline,  of  ritual,  and  of 

*  Mr.  Ruskin,  in  concluding  his  "  Notes  on  the  Construction  of  Sheepfolds," 
thus  speaks :  "  But  how  to  unite  the  two  great  sects  of  paralyzed  Protestants  ? 
By  keeping  simply  to  Scripture.  The  members  of  the  Scottish  church  have  not 
a  shadow  of  excuse  for  refusing  episcopacy  ;  it  has  indeed  been  abused  among 
them ;  grievously  abused  ;  but  it  is  in  the  Bible ;  and  that  is  all  they  have  a  right 
to  ask.  They  have  also  no  shadow  of  excuse  for  refusing  to  employ  a  written  form 
of  prayer.  It  may  not  be  to  their  taste  — it  may  not  he  the  way  in  which  they 
like  to  pi-ay  ;  but  it  is  no  question,  at  present,  of  likes  or  dislikes,  but  of  duties." 
(p.  49.)  Suppose  another  author  in  his  "  Notes  on  the  Construction  of  Slieep- 
folds"  were  to  say:  "  The  members  of  the  episcopal  church  have  not  a  shadow  of 
excuse  for  refusing  presbyterianism ;  it  has  indeed  been  abused  among  them ; 
but  it  is  in  the  Bible  ;  and  that  is  all  they  have  a  right  to  ask  ; "  would  not  the  one 
statement,  even  in  the  estimation  of  many  episcopalians  —  not  to  speak  of  thou- 
sands of  Christian  men  who  ai-e  neither  episcopalians  nor  presbyterians  —  be  as 
good  as  the  other?  In  truth,  no  section  of  the  Christian  church,  in  making  pro- 
posals for  union,  is  entitled  to  speak  in  this  strain  to  any  other  section.  It  is  an 
aping  of  Romish  airs,  it  is  a  setting  at  defiance  Christian  men's  conscientious 
convictions,  and  it  throws  a  stumbling-block  not  only  in  the  way  of  incorporation 
but  of  co-operation."  Christ  has  ordered  us  to  be  at  peace  one  with  another." 
But  these  are  not  the  terms. 

r2 


O^J;  DISUNION    OF    THE    CHUBCH. 

ceremonies,  in  such  a  world  as  ours  !  —  a  world  where  no  two  men 
are  not  as  distiuguishahle  in  their  mental  as  in  their  physical 
aspect;  where  every  petty  community  has  its  separate  system  of 
civil  government ;  where  all  that  meets  the  eye,  and  all  that  aiTests 
the  ear,  has  a  stamp  of  houndless  and  infinite  variety  ! "  * 

If  many  of  the  professed  friends  of  Christianity  have  erred  in 
then-  zeal  for  unilbrmity  of  religious  opinions  and  ceremonies,  its 
avowed  enemies  have  unfairly  argued  as  if  the  ahsence  of  uni- 
formity indicated  the  want  of  certitude.  In  "Voltaire's  Dictionary," 
Under  the  article  "  Sect,"  it  is  said,  "  there  is  no  sect  in  geometry 
mathematics,  or  experimental  philosophy.  When  truth  is  evident, 
it  is  impossible  to  divide  people  into  parties  and  factions.  Nobody 
disputes  that  it  is  broad  day  at  noon."  In  this  way  it  is  attempted 
to  preclude  all  inquiry  into  the  evidences  of  Christianity,  and  to 
lead  men  to  conclude  that  religion  has  no  fixed  data,  because  there 
have  been  so  many  conflicting  opinions  and  divisions  within  its 
province.  It  is  surely  a  miserably  ungenerous  charge  against  the 
Christian  religion,  that  it  has  not  the  evidence  of  the  mathematical 
sciences  — an  evidence  that  arises  out  of  their  very  nature,  but 
which  is  altogether  foreign  to  a  system  of  moral  truth.  The  argu- 
ment auiounts  to  this,  that  because  the  gospel  cannot  be  shown  to 
be  as  demonstrably  true  as  that  tlie  three  angles  of  a  triangle  are 
equal  to  tvfo  right  angles,  therefore  it  cannot  be  proved  to  be  true 
at  all.  In  other  words,  no  evidence  is  to  be  relied  on  but  that 
which  belongs  to  what  are  caUed  the  accurate  sciences.  By  such 
a  course  of  reasoning  as  this,  pohtical  economy,  for  example,  might 
be  denounced  as  a  baseless  science,  because  the  greatest  poUticians 
have  embraced  the  most  conflictiug  theories  in  legislation;  and 
all  philosophical  investigations,  that  are  not  of  a  strictly  mathema 
tical  chai-acter,  might  be  interdicted  as  useless,  because  they  liave 
given  rise  to  much  opposing  speculations.  Moral  subjects  can 
admit  of  no  evidence  that  is  incompatible  with  human  responsi- 
bility. So  that  to  object  that  Christianity  has  no  certainty  be- 
cause it  has  not  mathematical  certainty,  is  the  same  thing  as 
saving  that  it  cannot  be  true  because  it  wants  the  evidence  which 
would  deprive  men  of  the  liberty  of  rejecting  it.  Besides,  there 
are  no  inducements  for  a  sane  man  to  deny  that  two  and  two 
make  four,  or  that  it  is  broad  day  at  neon ;  but  there  are  strong 
mental  tendencies  which  lead  multitudes  to  darken  the  lustre  of 
Christianity,  and  to  deny  that  it  is  true.  A.s  a  system  of  pure 
]iioral  truth,  it  thwarts  d£.praved  human  propensities;  and  that 
accounts  for  its  being  ccJrrupted  or  rejected  by  men,  though  its 
evidences  stand  before  them  as  clear  and  majestic  as  the  sun. 

But  it  is  too  much  to  grant  that  there  are  no  sects  in  experi- 
mental philosophy.     Astronomy  and  geology  belong  to  the  m 

*  E3say3  in  Ecclesiastical  Biography,  vol.  i.  p.  518. 


DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH.  2  io 

ductive  sciences,  and  very  opposite  theories  in  both  have  been 
held  by  the  most  eminent  philosophers.  But  who  would  conclude, 
on  the  ground  of  these  conflicting  theories,  that  there  is  not  a  true 
system  of  astronomy  or  geology  ?  And  where  is  the  fairness  of 
denouncing  Christianity  as  the  most  uncertain  of  all  things,  be- 
cause its  adherents,  on  some  points,  have  held  very  different  opi- 
nions ?  The  objection,  we  are  noticing,  is  not  unlike  that  which 
is  urged  against  the  Gospel  on  account  of  the  mysterious  nature  of 
its  truths.  The  sciences  which  admit  of  demonstration,  pursued 
to  a  certain  length,  land  the  mind  in  a  region  of  mysteries,  as  well 
as  do  the  truths  of  revelation.  So  that,  if  the  attribute  of  mys- 
teriousness  is  sufficient  to  falsify  a  system,  it  would  falsify  the 
higher  branches  of  mathematical  science.  And  if  the  circumstance 
of  a  diversity  of  opinion  having  scope  v^^ithin  a  system,  be  an  argu- 
ment against  the  system  itself,  it  must  sweep  away  from  the  region 
of  the  true  many  other  commonly  received  systems  of  truth  besides 
the  religion  of  Christ. 

Mr.  Gladstone,  in  his  zeal  for  high  church  principles,  has 
asserted  that  the  state  of  the  exact  sciences  proves,  that,  as  respects 
religion,  "  the  association  of  these  two  ideas,  activity  of  inquiry, 
and  variety  of  conclusion,  is  a  fallacious  one."  His  brilliant  re~ 
vievs'-er,  Mr.  Macaulay,  says,  in  reply,  "  Our  way  of  ascertainiiiag: 
the  tendency  of  free  inquiry  is  simply  to  open  our  eyes  and.  look 
at .  the  world  in  which  we  live ;  and  there  we  see  that  free  inquiry 
on  mathematical  subjects  produces  unity,  and  that  free  inquiry  on 
moral  subjects  produces  discrepancy.  .  .  .  Discrepancy  tliere  will 
be  among  the  most  diligent  and  candid,  as  long  as  the  constitutio>ri 
of  the  human  mind,  and  the  nature  of  moral  evidence,  contimts 
unchanged.  That  we  have  not  freedom  and  unity  together  is  a 
very  sad  thing;  and  so  it  is  that  we  have  not  wings.  But  we  ars 
just  as  likely  to  see  the  one  defect  removed  as  the  other.  It  is  not 
only  in  religion  that  tliis  discrepancy  is  found.  It  is  the  same 
with  al]  matters  which  depend  on  moral  evidence,  with  judicial 
questions,  for  example,  and  with  political  questions.  All  thd 
judges  will  work  a  sum  in  the  rule  of  three  on  the  same  principle, 
and  bring  out  the  same  conclusion.  But  it  does  not  follow  that, 
however  honest  and  laborious  they  may  be,  they  will  all  be  of  one 
mind  on  the  Douglas  case."* 

But  if  it  is  vain  to  think  of  securing  union  in  the  church  bf 
a  visible  uniformity,  or  by  amalgamating  all  denominations  into 
one,  it  is  not  vain  to  seek  after  visible  unanimity  among  the  several 
sections  of  the  church  holding  those  fundamental  doctrines  whicli 
we  mentioned,  in  the  beginning  of  this  essay,  as  emphatically 
constituting  the  truth  of  God.  We  may,  and  will,  continue  to 
have  diversities  of  forms,  but  let  these  be  seen  to  be  animated  by 

*  Beview  of  Gladstone  on  Church  and  State,    (Edinburgh  Review,  April,  1839.) 


246  DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

an  all-pervading  unity  of  spirit.  It  is  obyiously  implied  in  the 
Saviour's  intercessory  prayer,  that  the  world  must  be  confirmed 
in  its  infidelity  by  the  visible  disunion  of  the  Christian  community ; 
and  that  the  world's  conversion  depends,  in  a  great  measure,  on 
the  palpable  unanimity  of  his  professed  followers.  He  prayed 
for  their  union,  in  order  that  the  world  might  believe  that  tne 
Father  had  sent  Him.  This  consummation,  so  devoutly  to  be 
wished,  would  have  a  favourable  bearing  on  mankind,  in  two  ways 
at  least,  just  as  the  divided  sta,te  of  the  church  has  an  unfavourabl© 
influence  in  two  opposite  ways. 

In  the  first  place,  the  exhibition  of  unity  would  tell  mightily  as 
a  demonstration  of  the  divinity  of  Clmstiauity.  "  Our  thoughts," 
remarks  tlie  author  of  the  Essay  on  the  Port-Royalists,  "  are 
steeped  in  imagery;  and  where  the  palpable  form  is  not,  the  im- 
palpable spirit  escapes  the  notice  of  the  unreflecting  multitude. 
In  com.mon  hands,  ^analysis  stops  at  the  species  or  the  genus,  and 
cannot  rise  to  the  order  or  the  class.  To  distinguish  birds  from 
fislies,  beasts  from  insects,  limits  the  efforts  of  the  vulgar  observer 
of  the  face  of  animated  nature.  But  Cuvier  could  trace  the  sub- 
lime unity,  the  universal  type,  the  fontal  Idea,  existing  in  the 
creative  intelligence,  which  connects  as  one  the  mammoth  and  the 
snail.  So,  common  observers  can  distinguish  from  each  other  the 
different  varieties  of  religious  society,  and  can  rise  no  higher. 
Where  one  assembly  worships  with  harmonies  of  music,  fumes  of 
incense,  ancient  liturgies,  and  a  gorgeous  ceremonial,  and  another 
listens  to  the  unaided  voice  of  a  single  pastor,  they  can  perceive 
and  record  the  differences ;  but  the  hidden  ties  whicli  unite  them 
both  escape  such  observation.  All  appears  as  contrast,  and  all 
ministers  to  antipathy  and  discord. "'-;=  The  sublime  unity  of  the 
church  of  Christ,  the  hidden  ties  which  link  one  member  with 
another,  and  all  with  tlie  Head,  escape  the  notice  of  the  world. 
They  are  spiritually  discerned.  Hence  the  necessity  of  a  visible 
outward  expression  of  the  real  hidden  unity.  Tlie  prayer  of  the 
God-man  Mediator  demands  palpable  unanimity.  Mere  unanimity 
among  the  adherents  of  any  sj^stem  does  not  of  itself  prove  the 
truth  of  that  system.  INIen  have  often  combined  for  the  propaga- 
tion of  error.  But  the  unity  may  be  of  such  a  kind,  displaying 
such  purit}"-,  disinterestedness,  and  benevolence,  as  to  carry  along 
with  it  a  convincing  evidence  that  it  is  of  God.  It  may  be  seen 
to  be  such  an  effect  as  no  known  motive  power  among  men  could 
produce,  and  which  must  be  ascribed  to  a  Divine  interposition. 

Such  was  the  visible  union  manifested  by  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians which  was  attended  with  such  remarkable  triumphs.  It  was 
such  a  union  of  heart  and  hand  for  bringing  the  greatest  glory  to 
God,  and  effecting  the  greatest  good  among  men,  as  the  world 

*  Sii-  James  Stephen's  Essays  iu  Eccles.  Biog.  vol.  i.  pp.  510,  520. 


DISUNIOM    OF    THE    CHURCH.  217 

never  saw.  It  was  a  lovely  persuasive  spectacle,  as  free  from 
selfish  elements  on  the  one  hand  as  from  fanaticism  on  the  other. 
The  world  beheld  men  of  every  diversity  of  character,  separated 
naturally  from  each  other  hy  different  habits  and  stations,  and  by 
the  most  conflicting  interests,  coming  under  tlie  transformino- 
influence  of  the  Christian  faith,  losing  thereby  their  mutual  repul- 
sions and  enmities,  moving  in  the  same  element  of  love,  bound 
sweetly  and  strongly  to  a  common  crucified  Lord  and  to  eacli  other, 
and  looking  on  that  world  with  something  of  the  benevolent  yearnings 
of  Him  who  came  to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost.  It  was 
not  a  union  of  men  who  had  agreed  to  merge  their  differing  tastes 
and  sentiments  in  a  common  impulse,  and  to  combine  for  the  pur- 
pose of  furthering  a  cause  which  would  get  them  a  name  on  the 
earth,  or  secure  some  worldly  interests.  In  such  a  case,  tlie 
heterogeneous  elements  might  have  been  driven  asunder,  mutual 
jealousies  and  rivalries  would  have  arisen,  and  the  bonds  of  union 
would  have  been  broken  amid  the  tumult  of  passions  and  conflict- 
ing gains.  Such  were  the  disastrous  results  of  the  introduction  of 
worldly  elements  afterwards  into  the  church.  But  it  was  a  union 
of  materials,  which,  though  originally  discordant,  underwent  a 
radical  change  ;  and,  while  each  reflected  the  image  of  their  com- 
mon Lord,  all  were  bound  in  love  to  one  another,  and  in  the  most 
disinterested  eflbrt  to  regenerate  and  bless  the  world.  Midtitudes 
beheld  the  astonishing  spectacle.  It  was  a  new  and  lovely  creation, 
which  coifld  not  be  accounted  for  on  natural  principles.  The 
purity,  love,  and  benevolence  of  the  Gospel,  were  impressively 
exhibited  in  the  community  of  its  professed  followers  ;  and,  in  that 
exhibition,  the  world  saw  and  felt  an  evidence  that  Christianity  is 
divine,  and  that  the  Father  had  sent  the  Son. 

So  will  it  be  again.  The  evidence  derived  from  the  palpable 
unanimity  of  the  Christian  church  is  emerging  forth  anew.  To 
this  result  the  leagued  assaults  of  infidelity  and  superstition  are 
contributing.  The  Eedeemer  with  his  fan  in  his  hand  is  purging 
his  floor,  making  more  manifest  the  broad  distinction  between  his 
friends  and  his  foes.  And  when  the  faithful  of  every  name  have 
ceased  to  make  matters,  confessedly  subordinate,  rallying  points 
for  a  party  ;  and  are  made  willing  to  acknowledge,  and  co-operate 
with,  airthose  v.ho  hold  by  the  Head;  M'hen  those  jealousies 
and  discords  are  banished  from  the  kingdom  of  God,  wliich 
however  natural  in  the  empires  of  earth,  are  uncongenial  to  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  ;  and  when  tlie  church  looks  forth  again  as  one 
united  force  on  the  world,  at  war  with  notliing  but  all  the  powers 
of  evil,  and  manifestly  the  greatest  instrument  of  good ;  all,  but 
the  wilfully  blinded  and  irrecoverably  depraved,  will  be  constrained 
to  acknowledge  the  hand  of  the  Invisible,  and  to  receive  Christianity 
as  of  God.  '^  Fain  would  I,"  says  Calvin,  "  that  all  the  churches 
of  Christ  were  so  united,  that  the  angels  miglit  look  down  from 


2-iS  DISUNION    OF    THE    CHURCH, 

Leaven  and  add  to  our  glory  with  their  harmony."  He  might  ha^'o 
added,  as  no  douLt  he  felt,  that  the  unreasonahleness  of  unbelief 
miglit  be  driven  from  one  of  its  refuges  of  lies. 

We  are  led  to  remark  secondly,  that  the  uuity  of  action,  conse- 
quent on  the  unity  of  exhibition,  would  tell  powerfully  on  the 
successful  propagation  of  Christianity.  Sectarianism  has  been  the 
bane  of  the  church.  Multiplied  divisions  have  weakened  her 
energies.  A  vast  amount  of  zeal  and  power,  which  should  have 
been  brought  to  bear  on  the  conversion  of  the  world,  has  been 
expended  in  assailing  and  defending  the  several  points  on  which 
the  Christian  community  has  been  split  into  fragments.  Christen- 
dom has  often  resembled  a  battle-field,  in  which  the  several 
detachments  of  the  same  army,  instead  of  combining  in  one 
aggressive  movement  against  the  common  foe,  have  raised  the 
shout  of  war  against  each  other.  The  enemy,  meanwhile,  has 
exulted  at  the  sight,  and  not  only  been  fortified  in  the  belief  that 
Christianity  is  a  profession  under  which  men  drive  low  and  selfish 
designs,  but  has  strengthened  his  position  in  defying  the  armies  of 
the  living  God.  The  storms  of  controversy  may  have  been  over- 
ruled for  purifying  the  atmosphere  of  the  church,  and  preserving 
in  vigour  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints ;  but  although  good 
has  come  out  of  the  evil,  the  evil  has  been  manifested  in  the 
consumption  of  so  much  intellectual  energy  and  effort  on  internal 
disputes,  which  might  have  been  bestowed  on  the  infinitely  nobler 
object  of  converting  the  world  to  God. 

There  have  been  great  questions  of  principle  involved  in  many 
of  the  divisions  of  the  church  ;  and  better  is  it  to  have  divisions, 
than  that  important  principles  should  be  sacrificed  ;  but  the  rent 
has  not  unfrequently  been  made  on  the  most  unjustifiable  pretexts  ; 
and  even  when  the  denominational  distinctions  have  been  called 
for,  the  zeal  in  aiding  the  common  object  of  evangelizing  the 
world,  has  been  wofully  disproportionate  to  that  bestowed  on 
lengthening  the  cords  and  strengthening  the  stakes  of  party 
interests.  The  primitive  chm-ch,  so  long  as  it  had  the  uuity  of 
exhibition,  had  the  unity  of  action  also.  It  not  only  presented 
one  undivided  front  to  the  w^rld,  but  it  brought  the  full  tide  of  its 
heavenly  energy  tc^  bear  on  the  point  of  the  world's  conversion. 
In  the  palpable  unanimity  of  the  Christian  community  was  not 
only  exhibited  a  lovely  persuasive  spectacle;  but,  out  of  that 
unanimity,  arose  a  might  of  benevolence  which,  like  a  noble  river, 
enriched  by  a  thousand  streamlets,  fertilized  and  gladdened  eveiy 
region  through  which  it  flowed.  The  force  which  was  afterwards 
spent  on  internal  strifes  and  party  interests,  was  exerted  in  execut- 
ing tlie  Lord's  commission  to  go  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the 
Grospel  to  every  creature ;  and  it  ran  speedily,  and  vast  multitudes 
everywhere  became  obedient  to  the  faith.  The  Church  stood  out 
from  the  world,  one  in  its  interests  and  aims,  and  the  world  felt  the 


DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH.  249 

power  of  its  instrumentality,  and  acknowledged  tliat  it  was  of  God. 
If  ever  there  was  a  period  when  Christianity  seemed  on  the  eve  of 
making  the  world  all  her  own,  it  was  within  the  century  after  the 
effusion  of  Pentecost,  when,  under  an  united  impulse,  and  endued 
Avith  power  from  on  high,  she  travelled  onward  in  the  greatness  of 
her  strength.  The  victories  of  Imperial  Rome  were  eclipsed  by 
the  bloodless  conquests  of  the  "  kingdom  not  of  this  world."  The 
standard  of  the  cross  was  planted  beyond  the  bounds  where  stood 
the  standard  of  Caesar.  And  the  angel,  having  the  everlasting 
Gospel,  flew  farther  than  the  Roman  eagles.  An  united  Churcli, 
in  the  face  of  the  most  powerful  obstacles,  spread  itself,  ■\^^thin  a 
century  after  the  ascension  of  Clu-ist,  more  rapidly  and  extensively 
than  it  has  done  in  any  single  century  since.  And,  as  already 
hinted,  without  assigning  this  as  exclusively  the  cause  of  the  rapid 
progi-ess  of  the  Gospel ;  or,  with  Gibbon,  accounting  it  one  of  a 
number  of  natural  causes  that  produced  the  unparalleled  effect — 
(for  the  question  occurs  whence  that  union?) — we  cannot,  with  the 
Saviour's  intercessory  prayer  before  us,  hesitate  to  acknowledge  it 
as  a  powerfully  subordinate  som-ce  of  the  Church's  strength. 
Ichabod  might  almost  have  been  written  upon  her — for  lier  gloiy 
had  nearly  departed — when  men  of  worldly  policy  tampered  with 
her  purity,  and  strifes  and  divisions  brake  her  in  pieces. 

But  there  have  been  noble  things  done  since,  by  the  combined 
efforts  of  large  portions  of  the  Christian  community,  which  indicate 
what  a  mighty  influence  for  good  a  thoroughly  united  church 
would  exert  on  the  mass  of  mankind.  The  Reformation  from 
Popery,  the  most  glorious  event  since  the  introduction  of  Christi- 
anity, was,  to  a  considerable  degree,  the  united  work  of  the 
children  of  God  that  were  scattered  abroad.  The  London  Mission- 
ary Society,  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible  Society,  the  Tract 
Society,  and  some  other  kindred  institutions,  have,  by  the  catho- 
licity of  their  constitution,  opened  up  common  channels,  into 
which  the  several  sections  of  the  church  might  bring  their  enlight- 
ened efforts,  and  thereby  diffuse  the  river  of  the  water  of  life  over 
our  own  and  other  lands.  But  these  have  been  but  earnests,  and 
indications  of  what  that  unity,  which  the  Saviour  prayed  for, 
would  effect.  It  is  no  Utopian  dream — a  thing  to  be  desired  rather 
than  expected — to  believe  that  the  time  will  come  when  the  church 
will  possess  that  unity  of  exhibition  and  of  action  of  which  wc 
have  been  speaking,  that  then  infidelity  will  be  driven  from  one  of 
its  refuges,  and  the  world,  now  unbelieving  without  a  cause,  will 
liave  a  clear  palpable  proof  that  the  Father  has  sent  the  Son,  and 
that  Christianity  is  divine.  The  old  sarcasm  of  the  unbeliever, 
derived  from  the  disjointed  and  disorderly  state  of  the  church,  will 
be  silenced;  the  repulsive  aspect,  which  divisions  have  given  to 
Christianity,  will  be  effaced,  and  her  native  loveliness  be  restored  ; 
a  mighty  stumbling-block,  in  the  w^ay  of  the  diffusion  of  the  Gospel, 


250  DISUNION    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

will  be  removed ;  and  Chrii?tians,  being  united  to  each  other  in 
heart  and  hand,  will  come,  with  a  moral  might  such  as  tlie  world 
has  not  experienced  for  ages,  to  the  help  of  the  Lord,  to  the  help 
of  ti^  Lord  against  the  mighty.  The  brief  but  bright  description 
of  the  churches  given  by  James  Montgomery,  will  then  be  realized  : 
— "distinct  as  tlio  billows,  but  one  as  the  sea."  Meanwhile  God, 
in  the  signs  of  the  times,  is  calling  upon  all  the  friends  of  the  pure 
"Gospel  truth  to  make  it  manifest  that  they  are  one.  The  religion 
of  Christ,  in  our  land,  is  powerfully  beset  by  a  bold  reviving 
Romanism  on  the  one  hand,  and  by  a  subtle,  busy,  well-organized 
infidelity  on  the  other.  Both  would,  in  a  great  measure,  be  dis- 
armed and  driven  back,  were  tlie  ranks  of  evangelical  Protestantism 
to  re-unite  and  move  forward  under  the  impulse  of  an  all-pervading 
spirit  of  unity.  Let  the  churches  hear  the  words  of  the  Genevese 
Eeformer,  whose  love  of  union  was  as  the  love  of  life  : — "  Keep  your/ 
smaller  differences,  let  us  have  no  discord  on  that  account ;  but 
let  us  march  in  one  solid  column,  under  the  banners  of  the  Captain 
of  our  salvation,  and  with  undivided  counsels  form  the  legions  of 
the  cross  upon  the  territories  of  darkness  and  of  death." 


PAET  THE   THIRD. 


THI?    PRESS. THE    CLUBS. — THE    SCHOOLS. THE    PULl'IT. 

TKtJTH  and  error,  good  and  evil,  are  propagated  in  the  world  bj 
the  same  instrumentalities;  "and  no  marvel,  for  Satan  himself  ivS 
tmnsft)rmed  into  an  angel  of  light."  The  most  powerful  means  in 
^accomplishing  the  greatest  good  are  made  the  most  effectual 
ministers  of  the  greatest  evil.  Infidelity  fights  truth  with  her  own 
wea23ons.  Aaron  casts  down  his  rod  before  Pharaoh,  and  it  becomes 
a  serpent,  and  the  magicians  of  Egypt  do  likewise  with  their 
enchantments.  The  die  that  gives  the  impress  to  the  genuine 
coin,  is  employed  to  stamp  the  counterfeit.^  The  poison  and  the 
healing  waters  flow  through  like  channels.  And  it  is  not  more 
common  for  good  men  and  bad  men  to  walk  on  the  same  roads, 
ride  in  the  same  carriages,  and  sail  in  the  same  ships,  than  it  is  for 
God's  truth  and  the  Devil's  lie  to  pass  through  the  same  medium. 
We  do  not  reckon  the  air  less  precious  as  the  gift  of  heaven, 
because  men  send  through  it  curses  as  well  as  blessings.  And  the 
agencies  for  disseminating  truth  are  not  a  whit  less  valuable  be- 
cause some  men  use  them  for  propagating  falsehood.  The  good 
and  the  evil  come  so  closely  together  in  this  world,  and  are  found 
in  such  perpetual  antagonism,  tliat  wherever  you  see  an  effective 
instrumentality  in  the  hands  of  the  former,  you  may  expect  to 
meet  with  a  like  one  in  the  hands  of  the  latter.  Infidelity  thus 
follows  after  faith  in  order  to  destroy  it.  The  magicians  are 
suffered  to  do  with  their  enchantments  in  like  manner  as  Aaron 
the  servant  of  God.  But  Aaron's  rod  at  last  swallows  up  their 
rods.  And  so  will  ultimately  be  destroyed  all  the  works  of  the 
devil.  Infidelity,  meanwhile,  is  up  and  doing ;  and,  as  if  conscious 
that  the  hour  of  decision  had  come,  is  vigorously  plying  for  eviL 
all  the  instnmientalities  of  good.  "  It  may  be,"  as  Professor 
Gai'bett  remarks,  "  that  at  all  the  periods  of  the  world,  the  rude 
material  of  unbelief  is  a  constant  quantity.  The  only  difference 
may  consist  in  the  presence  or  absence  of  outward  checks,  and 
such  repressive  influences  as,  in  ancient  times,  were  exercised  by 


2d2  the  press. 

those  civil  and  ecclesiastical  polities  which  can  never  be  reiiti- 
posed  upon  the  masses'  of  mankind.  The  spread  of  liberty  alike 
of  action  and  thought,  the  enormous  expansion  of  the  sphere  in 
wliich  intellect  ranges,  and,  above  all,  the  approximation,  tlu'ough 
the  press,  of  man  to  man,  and  the  contact  of  intellect  with  intellect, 
have,  on  this  hypothesis,  only  quickened  and  revealed  what  was 
always  latent."  =;=  But  so  it  is.  The  power  of  the  Press,  of  the 
Clubs,  of  the  Schools,  and  of  the  Pulpit,  is  -wielded  most  effectually 
on  tlie  side  of  the  various  forms  of  infidelity. 


^  CHAPTER  I. 

THE    PRESS. 

Great  power  of  this  agency— Its  benignant  doings  in  the  world— Powerfully  em- 
ployed on  the  side  of  infidelity — Great  breadth  of  the  reading  niiud — Unprece- 
dented cheapness  and  abundance  of  literature — Influx  from  Germany — Shoal 
of  French  novels — Carlyle  and  hig  imitators — Influence  of  Combe's  Constitution 
of  jMau — Tractarian  books  for  the  village  poor— Periodical  literature  the  strong- 
est combined  agency — French  Newspaper  Press — The  feuilleton — Continental 
Press  in  general — Our  own  periodical  literature — Newspapers — Classification 
of  the  enormous  issue  of  anti-Christian  cheap  publications:  1st.  The  avoicedly 
infidel  —  Organ  of  atheistic  secularism — 2ud.  The  polluting — Disclosures  of 
Mr.  Mayhew — 3rd.  The  latitudinarian — The  "  Family  Herald" — 4th.  Tlie  mor- 
ralhj  neutral — The  Church  becoming  awake  to  the  evil — Improvement  in  some 
old  influential  organs — Edinburgh  Review — Good  service  doing  by  younger 
ones — A  lack  of  clieap  entertaining  Christianized  literature — Defect  of  Cham- 
bers'—Resources of  the  Church. 

The  mightiest  agency  of  modern  times,  in  disseminating  either 
good  or  evil,  is  unquestionably  the  Press.  It  has  long  been  the 
rival  of  the  pulpit,  and  is  now,  if  we  mistake  not,  in  the  wide 
range  of  its  influence,  far  ahead  of  it.  Millions  who  listen,  week 
after  week,  to  the  living  voice  of  the  preacher,  are  daily  fed  by  the 
press  ;  and  millions  more  are  only  accessible  by  its  instrumentality, 
and  to  them  it  is  the  great  teacher.  The  time  was  when  it  was 
otherwise.  Before  the  discovery  of  printing,  society  was  almost 
entirely  dependent  on  oral  instruction.  Books  existing  in  the 
sliape  of  manuscripts,  were  few  and  costly,  aud  beyond  the  reach 
of  all  but  the  wealthy.  Men  learned  nearly  every  thing  that  they 
did  learn  from  the  orator  in  the  forum,  from  the  i)hilosopher  in 
the  schools,  or  from  the  preacher  in  the  church.  The  breadth 
of  mind  that  came  under  such  influences  was  by  no  means  gene- 
rally gi'eat ;  and,  if  we  except  the  illustrious  teachers  of  the  ancient 
world  and  the  preachers  of  the  eai'ly  age  of  the  church,  the  instru- 
meutalities  as  means  of  instruction  were  for  the  most  part  power- 
less.    But  the  press,  for  the  last  three   centuries,  has   occupied 

*  Modern  Philosophical  lufidelitj'. 


THE    I'EESS.  053 

njuch  of  the  grouud  tliat  once  belonged  exclusively  to  the  oral 
iustructor ;  and  with  vast  multitudes  in  our  day  it  is  made  the 
chief,  if  not  the  sole  teacher.  This  is  the  case  to  a  considerablo 
extent  in  our  own  country,  and  much  more  is  it  so  in  France  and 
other  parts  of  the  Continent.  The  appetite  for  periodical  litera- 
ture, on  both  sides  of  the  Channel,  is  strong.  And  every  class, 
movement,  and  interest  are  represented,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree, 
in  the  mighty  current.  Like  a  never  failing  fountain,  the  press 
is  sending  forth  its  publications  of  every  possible  variety  of 
character,  as  numerous  as  the  dew-drops  from  the  womb  of  the 
morning,  all  of  which  are  exerting  an  influence  for  good  or  evil  on 
the  masses  with  vdioni  they  come  in  contact.  It  has  been  said — 
and,  notwithstanding  the  temporary  thraldom  to  wliich  the  French 
press  is  now  subjected,  the  statements  ai'e  still  substantially  true — 
"  without  a  newspaper,  France  is  deaf.  .  .  .  Every  morning 
when  it  awakes,  the  reading  public  of  France  is  appealed  to  by  the 
defenders  of  interests,  parties,  ideas,  systems  of  all  descriptions, 
waging  war  against  one  another,  for  the  conquest  of  the  ])resent, 
or  the  direction  of  the  futiu-e,  Eeligion,  politics,  philosophy, 
industry,  arts,  sciences — everything  is  represented,  everything 
finds  an  utterance,  everything  stirs  about,  under  the  full  blaze 
of  daily  publicity  :  everything — except  Evangelical  Protestantism; 
for,  in  this  universal  concert  of  human  passions  and  convictions, 
the  voice  of  the  Gospel  alone  is  missing."* 

If  this  description  does  not  apply,  in  every  particular,  to  our 
own  country  (and  we  rejoice  to  think  that  it  does  not),  it  is  for  the 
most  part  applicable  to  the  range  and  influence  of  our  own  press. 
It  sends  forth  its  streams  of  powerful  influence  for  weal  or  woe, 
far  and  wide ;  here  diffusing  the  blessings  of  heavenly  truth  and 
holy  beauty,  and  there  scattering  the  curses  of  error  and  moral 
desolation. 

"By  thee  religion,  liberty,  and  laws, 
Exert  their  influence  and  advance  their  cause  : 
By  thee  worse  plagues  than  Pharaoh's  laud  befell, 
Diffused,  make  earth  the  vestibule  of  hell ; 
Thou  fountain,  at  which  drink  the  good  and  wise. 
Thou  ever-bubbling  spring  of  endless  lies; 
Like  Eden's  dread  probationary  tree, 
Knowledge  of  good  and  evil  is  from  thee."+ 

The  good  resulting  from  the  press,  upon  the  whole,  is  certainly 
much  greater  than  the  evil.  '  The  invention  of  printing  has  proved 
one  of  the  mightiest  and  most  beneficent  instnunentalities  that  has 
been  brought  to  bear  upon  the  world.  The  civilization  of  mankind 
has  advanced  rapidly  since  this  noble  discovery.  It  has  been  one 
of  the  most  effective  agencies  in  scattering  the  seeds  of  immortal 
trutli  ai)road  among  men.     And  all  who  take  an  interest  in  the 

*  Pastor  Boucher.     (In  "  The  Power  of  the  Press,"  p.  32.) 
+  Cowper's  Progress  of  Error. 


254  THE    PRESS. 

advancement  of  human  society  have  reason  to  thank  God  for  the 
press.  It  gave  the  mightiest  impulse  to  the  revival  of  learning  in 
the  fifteenth  century.  It  roused  the  mind  of  Europe  from  the 
sleep  of  the  middle  ages,  and  made  the  nations  feel  that  they  were 
men.  It  not  only  brought  to  light,  and  scattered  abroad,  the 
treasures  of  classical  literature,  but  it  was  early  consecrated  to  the 
work  of  quickly  multiplying  and  disseminating  the  sacred  Sciip- 
tm-es  which  were  hidden  and  rare.  But  for  the  press,  the  lieform- 
ation,  that  most  benignant  of  events  since  the  introduction  of 
Christianity,  had  probably  never  taken  place.  By  its  agency  in 
promoting  the  revival  of  learning,  the  way  was  prepared  for  tlie 
overthrow  of  mental  despotism,  and  for  teaching  men,  in  oppo- 
sition to  human  authority,  the  right  of  private  judgment,  and  the 
duty  of  appealing,  in  things  sacred,  to  "  the  law  and  the  testimony." 
And  wheji  the  Keformation  had  been  effected,  this  agency  was  yet 
more  powerfully  exerted  in  extending  and  strengthening  it,  by 
diffusing  the  writings  of  the  reformers  and  vernacular  copies  of 
the  Bible  among  the  people.  Luther  influenced  the  mind  of 
Germany,  not  only  by  the  energy  of  his  living  voice;  but,  by  his 
version  of  the  Scriptures — edition  after  edition  of  which  issued 
from  the  press  —  he  pushed  on  the  good  work  in  his  own  country 
and  in  other  lands.  And  while  Latimer  and  Eidley,  by  their 
preaching,  told  on  the  crowds  of  Englishmen  that  flocked  to  hear 
them,  Tyndale  and  Coverdale,  by  their  printed  translations  of  the 
Divine  word,  influenced  not  only  those  crowds,  but  tens  of  thou- 
sands who  were  beyond  the  reach  of  the  voice  of  the  reformers. 
It  is  to  the  press,  as  an  instrument,  that  we  greatly  owe  our  civil 
and  religious  liberties.  By  it,  as  well  as  by  preaching,  the  word 
of  the  Lord  has  had  free  course  and  been  glorified.  The  darkness, 
superstition,  and  despotism  of  the  middle  ages  can  never  return  ; 
the  messengers  of  truth  must  run  to  and  fro,  and  knowledge  be 
increased ;  and  the  nations,  in  spite  of  all  temporary  checks,  must 
advance  onward  in  the  path  of  light,  liberty,  and  happiness,  so 
long  as  this  mighty  agency  pours  its  enlightening  and  enlivening 
influences  over  the  heart  of  human  society.  Men  do  well  to  be 
jealous  of  whatever  tends  to  shackle  and  corrupt  such  a  divine 
instrumentality  as  the  press.  And  were  the  civilized,  and 
especially  the  Christianized  nations  of  the  world,  truly  grateful, 
they  would  thank  the  God  of  heaven  for  the  press,  and  beseech 
Him  to  preserve  it  free  and  uncorruptible,  and  consecrate  its 
energies  to  the  cause  of  immortal  truth. 

But  if  the  press  be  a  powerful  agency  for  good,  it  is  unquestion- 
ably a  powerful  agency  for  evil  also.  Out  of  the  same  mouth 
proceedeth  blessing  and  cursing,  and  this  fountain  sends  forth 
sweet  water  and  bitter.  If  it  has  been  greatly  instrumental  in 
multiplying  our  Bibles,  and  propagating  divine  truth  among  the 
nations,  it  has  been,  and  is,  greatly  instrumental  in  disseminating 


THE    PRESS.  255 

anti-Christian  sentiments  and  pernicious  errors.  We  can  very  well 
hold  that  the  press  does  more  good  than  evil,  and  yet  maintain 
that  the  evil  is  fearfully  great.  Divine  truth  is,  from  its  very 
nature,  imperishable;  whereas  error,  however  mischievous  in  its 
influence  for  the  time,  is  doomed  to  destruction.  And  we  have 
more  hope  of  a  few  seeds  of  heavenly  truth,  scattered  here  and 
there,  producing  much  lasting  good,  than  fear  of  a  gi-eater  num- 
ber of  pernicious  principles  cliecting  much  lasting  evil.  But  the 
harm,  at  certain  periods  and  in  certain  countries,  may  greatly 
jDreponderate  over  the  good,  and  this  we  aj^prehend  is  true  in 
reference  to  the  present  state  of  the  press  in  many  lands.  It  is 
powerfully  employed  on  the  side  of  infidelity.  It  is  ceaselessly 
sending  forth  publications  of  almost  every  shape  and  character, 
like  the  sand  by  the  sea-shore  for  number,  which  must  be  assigned 
to  the  account  of  evil. 

The  age  in  which  we  live  is  unprecedented  for  the  clieapness 
and  abundant  supply  of  its  literature.  The  huge  costly  tomes 
which  were  within  reach  of  comparatively  few  of  our  ancestors, 
have  given  place  to  the  small  and  low-jn-iced  volume  which  is 
accessible  to  all.  Speculations,  decidedly  hostile  to  true  religion 
and  to  man's  best  interests,  are  no  longer  confined  to  the  upper 
and  more  refined  classes  of  society ;  but  they  have  descended 
through  the  many  channels  opened  up  by  the  prolific  press  to  the 
reading  millions  of  the  present  time.  Our  age  is  characterized  by 
the  large  superficies  of  the  reading  mind  rather  than  by  its 
solidity  and  depth.  The  thii-st  for  reading  of  a  light  and  novel 
kind  is  almost  universal  and  insatiable.  The  poorest  artisan  must 
have  a  library  out  of  which  he  can  read,  and  one  or  more  cheap 
journals  which  he  can  devour.  The  great  competition  in  the 
press  naturally  tempts  its  conductors  to  minister  to  the  public 
tastes  whatever  these  be,  and  unhappily,  amid  such  a  large  pro- 
prietary, many  ai*e  to  be  found  ready  to  yield  fully  to  the  tempta- 
tion. Every  diversity  of  sentiment  and  interest  is  represented  by 
the  press,  and  carried,  by  its  cheap  and  rapid  agency,  throughout 
the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land;  and  the  misfortune  is,  that  so 
large  a  proportion  of  these  sentiments  and  interests,  thus  spread 
abroad,  are  adverse  to  that  interest  which  is  the  most  noble  and 
precious  of  all. 

It  is  the  periodical  press — that  mighty  engine  in  the  civilized 
world — that  we  have  more  immediately  in  view,  when  speaking  of 
the  press  as  the  chief  agency  in  propagating  infidelity.  And  it  is 
to  be  remembered  that,  in  our  periodical  literature,  we  have  poj^u- 
larised  the  anti-religious  notions  that  appear  in  a  more  abstract 
form  in  books  of  a  higher  stamp.  Before  coming  down,  however, 
to  what  is  strictly  called  the  periodical,  we  see  no  little  power  put 
forth  by  the  press  on  the  side  of  evil.  It  were  not  difficult  to  fix 
upon  a  considerable  number  of  works  of  high  pretensions  and 


256  THE    PEESS. 

extensive  cii'culation  that  have  proceeded  from  the  modern  press, 
which  are  either  openly  or  insidiously  detrimental  to  genuine 
religion.  They  are  to  he  met  with  in  the  departments  of  theologj^ 
of  literature,  and  of  science.  Belonging  to  the  first  of  these,  we 
have  a  large  and  rapidly  increasing  numher  of  hooks  in  the  form 
<if  a  philosophical  theism  appealing  to  the  educated  mind,  the 
tendency  of  which  is  to  cut  up,  root  and  hranch,  all  that  is  dis- 
tinctively Christian,  and  to  suhstitute  a  self-relying  deism.  In 
literature  and  science,  we  have  not  a  little  in  which  upper  and 
under  crn'rents  of  scepticism  are  too  perceptible ;  and  siiil  more 
in  which  Christian  truths  and  principles  are  ignored  when  they 
might  have  been  most  fittingly  introduced.  Judgiug  from  many 
publications  which  are  sent  forth  amid  the  lull  blaze  of  Gospel 
light,  and  vv-liich  possess  this  negative  characteristic,  one  could 
never  infer  that  such  a  thing  as  Christianity  existed  amoug  men. 
Multitudes  of  authors  woukl  seemingly  reckon  it  weakness,  or 
fanaticism,  to  be  indebted  to  revelation  for  a  sentiment,  a  prin- 
ciple, or  an  embellishment. 

The  press  in  Germany  is,  to  an  alarming  extent,  steeped  in 
infidelity.  This  holds  true  both  of  the  higher  and  lower  litera- 
ture. "  The  left-hand  school  of  Hegel,"  remarks  Dr.  Krummacher, 
"  knew  how  to  find  its  way  among  the  lowest  classes  of  the  people, 
by  making  its  philosophy  popular,  in  a  flood  of  pamphlets,  novels, 
romances,  etc.  In  consequence  of  this,  it  is  natural  that  atheism, 
v/hich  opposes  religion  in  every  form,  denies  the  existence  of  God, 
personal  immortality,  and  the  moral  order  of  the  world,  should 
spread  further  and  further  This  secret  of  wickedness  had  long 
sneaked  about  hi  darkness ;  but  no  one  would  credit  it,  up  to  the 
yeai-  1848.  Since  then,  truly,  we  have  been  convinced  of  the  con- 
trary." ^'=  Numbers  of  noble  Christian  men  in  Germany,  who  are 
fully  aware  of  this,  are  vigorously  exerting  themselves  to  command 
the  influence  of  the  press  on  the  side  of  Gospel  truth,  aud  to  in- 
crease tlie  popular  Christian  literature.  And  while  we  may  be 
thankful  to  that  land  for  its  treasures  of  Biblical  criticism  and 
profound  research,  imported  to  us  through  the  press  ;  yet  it  cannot 
be  forgotten  that  these  treasures  have  not  unfrequenily  come  to 
us  with  an  infidel  theological  literature,  the  influence  of  which  has 
been  such  on  the  literature  of  our  own  country,  as  would  almost 
lead  us  to  doubt  whether  the  amount  of  good  has  not  been  over- 
balanced by  the  amount  of  evil.  It  is  unquestionably  from  this 
source  that  we  have  derived  the  spirit,  so  prevalent  among  many 
of  our  haff-literary,  half-philosophical  writers,  which  tends  to 
destroy  a  historical  and  heaven -inspired  Christianity,  and  which 
would  leave  nothing  in  its  place  but  a  kind  of  vague,  floating, 
religious  sentiment — the  collective  produce  of  many  minds. 

*  The  Religious  Conditions  of  Christendom,  p.  425.  (1852). 


THE    PRESS.  257 

The  press  is  bringing  us,  among  other  things,  from  France,  a 
shoal  of  light,  popular  novels,  which  are  pregnant  with  the  seeds 
of  irreligion  ;  and  which,  it  is  believed  on  good  grounds,  have  had 
no  small  influence  in  producing  the  dissoluteness  so  fearfully 
characteristic  of  modern  French  society.  The  writings  of 
Rousseau  and  the  men  of  his  school  are  considered  to  have  been 
more  effective  than  any  other  cause  in  producing  the  dreadful 
convulsions  in  the  early  days  of  the  great  French  Revolution. 
And  the  productions  of  Eugene  Sue,  George  Sand,  Dumas, 
and  others,  tell  powerfully  for  any  thing  but  good  on  a  large 
portion  of  French  society,  and  on  the  society  of  other  states. 
The  evil  of  these  same  novels  is,  not  merely  that  they  incapacitate 
the  minds  of  the  readers  of  them  for  any  thing  like  serious  thought, 
which  in  itself  is  no  trifling  injury,  but  that  an  air  of  romance  is 
thrown  around  libertinism,  profligacy,  and  crime,  well  fitted  to  sink 
religion  and  exalt  vice  in  the  estimation  of  many.  These  anti- 
Christian  productions  are  wafted  far  and  wide.  Mr.  De  Vere, 
speaking  of  Athens,  says,  "  The  young  men,  I  fear,  are  somewhat 
infected  with  sceptical  opinions,  a  circumstance  which  may,  in 
some  measure,  be  accounted  for  by  the  attention  paid  to  French 
literature.  French  novels  are  the  works  which  chiefly  abound  in 
the  bookshops.  Can  one  imagine  a  greater  misfortune,  especially 
to  so  yoimg  a  nation  ?"  These  works  have  come  in,  like  a  deluge, 
on  America,  and  they  are  making  their  way  in  our  own  country,  de- 
structive of  evei-y  thing  deserving  the  name  of  moi-ality  and 
religion.  In  the  catalogues  of  cheap  circulating  libraries,  they  are 
to  be  found  side  by  side  with  books  of  which  it  may  be  said,  that 
they  are  arrayed  in  fine  linen,  clean  and  white — reminding  one  of 
the  tempter  and  the  Holy  One  in  the  wilderness.  And  it  generally 
happens  that  where  there  is  a  relish  for  the  one,  there  is  a  dislik:.". 
for  the  other. 

Of  our  own  home  produce,  we  have  not  a  few  works  of  note 
through  which  runs,  either  broadly  or  stealthily,  a  vein  of  infidel 
philosophy.  Some  of  them  must  be  assigned  to  the  idealistic,  and 
others  of  them  to  the  sensational  school.  Mr.  Carlyle,  whose 
influence  on  thinking  minds  of  a  peculiar  cast  is  perhaps  greater 
tlian  that  of  any  living  writer,  is  the  acknowledged  chief  of  the 
former.  He,  as  vre  have  already  remarked,  says  nothing  disrespect- 
ful of  the  gospel  of  Christ;  yet  he  may  not  unjustly  be  regarded 
as  waging  under  covert,  a  war  against  the  claims  of  a  historical 
Christianity,  or  as  endeavouring  to  bring  men  to  look  upon  all 
religious  creeds  as  having  the  same  subjective  origin,  and  to  con- 
found or  identify  earnestness  with  truth.  What  poor  John 
Sterling  says  to  Mr.  Carlyle,  in  his  last  brief  letter —  a  letter  "  fit  to  be 
for  ever  memorable  to  the  receiver  of  it" — could  doubtless  be  said 
by  multitudes  of  individuals  who  have  come  under  his  influence  : 
"  towards  me  it  is  still  more  true  than  towards  England,  that  no 

s 


258  THE    PRESS. 

man  has  been  and  done  like  you."-i^  Great,  indeed,  is  the  respon- 
sibility of  his  leadership.  Such  a  man  raises  up  a  host  of  imitators 
who  are  quick  to  discern  and  eager  to  lay  hold  of  the  worst  part  of 
his  teaching,  to  obtrude  it  at  every  point,  and  to  carry  it  undis- 
guiscdly  to  such  an  extreme  as  he  himself  would  probably  deem 
offensive. 

"  We  should  think,"  says  Mr.  Henry  Eogers,  "  that  some  of 
these  more  powerful  minds  must  be  by  this  time  ashamed  of  that 
ragged  regiment  of  most  shallow  thinkers,  and  obscure  writers  and 
talkers,  wlio  at  present  infest  our  literature,  and  whose  parrot-like 
repetition  of  their  own  stereotyped  phraseology,  mingled  with  somo 
barbarous  infusion  of  half- Anglicised  German,  threatens  to  form 
as  odious  a  cant  as  ever  polluted  the  stream  of  thought,  or  dis- 
figured the  purity  of  language.  As  in  Byron's  day,  there 
were  thousands  to  whom  the  world  '  was  a  blank' at  twenty  or 
thereabouts,  and  of  whose  '  dark  imaginings,'  as  Macaulay  says, 
the  waste  was  prodigious;  so  now  there  are  hundreds  of  dilettanti 
pantheists,  mystics  and  sceptics,  to  whom  everything  is  a  '  sham,' 
an  'unreality;'  who  tell  us  that  the  world  stands  in  need  of  a 
great  'prophet,'  a  'seer,'  a  'true  priest,'  a  'large  soul,'  a  'god-like 
soul' — who  shall  dive  into  'the  depths  of  the  human  consciousness,' 
and  whose  'utterances'  shall  roTise  the  human  mind  from  the 
'cheats  and  frauds' which  have  hitherto  everywhere  jiractised  on 
its  simplicity.  They  tell  us,  in  relation  to  philosophy,  religion, 
and  especially  in  relation  to  Christianity,  that  all  that  has  been 
believed  by  mankind  has  been  believed  only  on  '  empirical' groimds ; 
and  that  the  old  answers  to  difficulties  will  do  no  longer.  They 
shake  their  heads  at  such  men  as  Clarke,  Paley,  Butler,  and  declare 
chat  such  arguments  as  theirs  will  not  satisfy  them."\ 

The  existence  of  such  a  "ragged  regiment,"  nevertheless,  shows 
the  influence  of  one  or  two  great  minds  and  the  grave  responsi- 
bility they  incur  in  sending  abroad,  by  means  of  the  press,  thoughts 
that  are  openly  or  covertly  hostile  to  the  gospel  of  Christ.  The 
influence  of  Lord  Byron  has  passed,  but  the  misanthropy  and 
voluptuousness  of  his  poetry  did  then  work  of  mischief;  and  mul- 
titudes of  young  persons,  out  of  an  enthusiastic  admiration  for  him, 
were  formed  to  a  character  the  very  reverse  of  the  ethics  of  the 
gospel.  The  influence  of  those  writers  who  are  contending  against 
the  paramount  claims  of  historical  Christianity,  will  also  pass 
away;  but  they  too,  meanwhile,  perform  their  part  in  keeping 
men  from  the  faith  of  the  truth  and  the  love  of  the  Saviour.  How 
many  of  our  polite  writers  have  gone,  or  are  advancing,  into 
eternity,  as  John  Foster  says,  "  under  the  charge  of  having  em- 
ployed their  genius,  as  the  magicians  their  enchantments  against 
Moses,  to  counteract  the  Saviour  of  the  world."| 

♦Life  of  sterling,  p.  334.  +  Rogers'  Essays,  vol.  ii.  p.  316. 

i  Foster's  Essays,  p.  341. 


THE    PRESS.  259 

Of  our  modern  productions  of  the  sensational  school,  "Combe's 
Constitution  of  Man,"  if  not  the  most  profound  and  philosophical, 
has  doubtless  been  the  most  popularized  and  extensively  circulated. 
The  naturalism  of  this  work,  as  we  have  seen,  is  broad  and  undis- 
guised. Containing,  as  it  does,  many  valuable  remarks  on  the 
operation  of  natural  laws,  and  the  consequences  of  infringing  them, 
it,  by  making  these  laws  explanatory  of  all  phenomena,  explodes  the 
idea  of  an  interposing  and  superintending  Providence ;  so  that, 
had  it  been  possible,  God  might  as  well  have  ceased  to  exist  after 
the  creation  of  the  world.  Upwards  of  eiglity  thousand  copies  of 
this  work  have  issued  from  the  press  of  our  own  country,  besides 
having  obtained  a  wide  circulation  in  America,  and  having  been 
translated  into  various  foreign  languages.  Having  had  the  ad- 
vantage of  a  liberal  bequest,  it  has  appeared,  in  numerous  cheap 
editions,  for  circulation  among  the  people,  and  even  for  introduction 
into  the  schools;  so  that,  in  so  far  as  a  cheap  press  is  concerned, 
nothing  has  been  wanting  to  leaven  tlie  masses  with  its  principles. 
To  this  work,  despite  its  many  useful  facts  and  lessons,  nuiltitudes 
of  our  reading  artisans  are  indebted  for  those  popular  infidel 
objections  which  are  urged  against  the  doctrine  of  divine  Provi- 
dence and  special  prayer.  Sensationalism  is  doubtless  on  the 
wane,  and  the  triumph  of  Combe,  if  we  mistake  not,  has  passed; 
but  it  were  vain  to  deny  that  such  works  as  the  "  Constitution  of 
Man,"  pervaded  as  they  are  with  principles  antagonistic  to 
spiritual  Christianity,  have  exerted  a  disastrous  influence  on 
many  minds.  And  such  influences,  we  may  be  assured,  are  not 
obliterated,  like  the  wake  of  a  sliip  by  the  next  rolling  wave. 

Besides  such  works  as  these,  which  address  themselves  more 
especially  to  a  peculiar  cast  ot  cultivated  minds,  or  to  our  reading 
artisans,  there  is  a  class  of  books,  of  recent  growth,  designeil  for 
the  village  poor,  in  which  are  insidiously  taugfit  Tractarian  2"»rin- 
ciples,  the  tendency  of  which  is  to  substitute  a  merely  ceremonial 
Christianity  for  the  spiritual  gos]iel  of  Christ.  Archbishop 
Whately,  in  his  "  Cautions  for  Ihe  Times,"  remaiks  of  the  promo- 
ters of  Tractism,  that  "  at  first  they  gained  an  almost  unexam[)led 
command  of  the  public  press  .  .  ,  Nor  was  it  only  by  tiie 
open  and  direct  inculcation  of  their  opinions  they  mace  way  for 
themselves.  That  which  one  of  the  original  conspirators  a])tly 
called  '  the  2'>oisoning  sijsteni  proved  even  still  more  efiectual. 
"Works  were  produced  in  almost  every  style  of  composition,  to 
catch  the  unwary,  and  the  tenets  of  Tractism  cautiously  infused 
into  them  all,  so  as  to  steal  upon  the  reader  when  he  least  expected 
them ;  when  he  took  up  the  volume  only  to  verify  some  fact  of 
ancient  history,  or  to  beguile  an  hour  with  an  amusing  tale. 
Their  ahn,  indeed,  was  to  create  a  literature  for  themselves,  and 
exercise  an  influence  over  everything  that  came  before  the  public 

s  2 


260  .  THE    PRESS. 

mind,  from  the  discussions  of  the  severest  science  down  to  the 
songs  and  stories  of  the  nursery."^- 

The  class  of  books  to  which  we  refer  is  an  illustration  of  the 
carrying  on  "the  poisoning  system."  A  simple  story  of  village 
life,  full  of  pleasing  incidents,  and  told  in  an  agreeable  style,  is 
made,  with  no  little  cleverness,  the  medium  of  infusing  into  the 
minds  of  unlettered  rustics  the  tractarian  poison.  The  curate  or 
rector,  who  figures  in  the  tale,  does  great  and  good  things.  The 
parish,  which  he  found  like  a  barren  and  neglected  wilderness, 
becomes,  under  his  assiduous  ministry,  a  fruitful  field  wliich  the 
Lord  hath  blessed.  Of  course,  he  is  a  tractarian.  He  discourses, 
in  a  winning  way,  about  the  efficacy  of  tlie  sacraments,  the  rever- 
ence due  to  the  authority  of  tlie  church,  the  diviuity  that  hedges 
round  the  j^^'ayer-book,  and  such  like.  The  atonement,  contrary 
to  Scripture,  is  thrown  into  the  back-ground,  and  made  a  sort  of 
reserve-doctrine ;  and  the  faith  inculcated  is  faith  in  the  mere 
ceremonials  of  the  Gospel,  not  faith  in  what,  in  the  estimation  of 
apostolic  men,  constitutes  its  very  core  —  the  doctrine  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  Him  crucified.  In  these  books,  to  quote  from  one  of  our 
Reviews,!  there  is  an  attempt  insidiously  made  to  exalt  "  the  very 
brick  and  mortar  of  the  church,  at  the  expense  of  spiritual  religion. 
A  distressing  formalism  in  them  very  destructive  of  the  pure  and 
simple  faith — the  leaning  upon  the  merits  of  the  Redeemer- —which 
is  emphatically  the  'religion  of  the  poor.'"  We  mark  this,  then, 
as  an  agency  to  make  men  formalists,  and  wiiich  may,  by  a  not 
uncommon  reaction,  lead  the  more  thoughtful  among  them,  in 
their  disgust  at  "church  principles,"  to  repudiate  Christianity 
itself 

But  we  turn  to  the  Periodical.  In  this  department  of  the  press, 
we  find  the  strongest  combined  agency  for  propagating  anti- 
Christian  principles.  The  strength  expended  on  periodical  litera- 
ture, in  our  age,  is  prodigious;  and  marvellous  is  the  phancy  of 
tliis  great  agency.  The  nev/spaper,  which,  for  the  wide  range  of 
its  influence,  and  as  an  indispensable  element  in  modern  civiliza- 
tion, has  been  aptly  called  "  the  Fourtli  Estate,"  is  the  creation  of 
tlie  seventeenth  century.  The  first  regular  newspaper  started  into 
existence  about  the  close  of  the  reign  of  James  the  First,  and  but 
shortly  after  tlie  death  of  Shakspeare.  From  the  great  English 
Kevolution,  wlien  newspapers  appeared  in  such  numbers,  journal- 
ism has  constituted  a  power  w4iich  has  told  mightily  on  society.]; 
But  it  is  in  our  time  that  this  power  has  waxed  so  strong,  both 
in  our  own  country  and  on  the  Continent.  With  the  commence- 
ment of  the  eighteenth  century,  appeared  the  Iveview.  Then 
followed  the  British  Essayists,  who  exerted  a  powerful  influence  on 

*  Cautions  for  the  Times,  p-  294  +  North  British,  May,  18o2. 

i  Hunt's  Fourth  Estate. 


THE   PRESS.  261 

the  reading  mind  of  the  age.  They  sternly  reproved  the  follies, 
and  were  influential  in  correcting  the  vices,  of  their  times.  But 
they  neglected  the  opportunities  which  they  had,  of  thoroughly 
leavening  their  elegant  moral  papers  with  the  evangelical  element 
of  that  religion  w'hich  they  professed  to  venerate.  Since  that  period, 
a  large  class  of  readers  has  risen  up.  Such  men  as  Addison  and 
Johnson  addressed  themselves  chiefly  to  the  middle  and  upper 
classes,  while  they  left  the  masses  ranging  helow  them  almost  un- 
touched; hut  the  Press  is  now,  in  a  very  extensive  degree,  the 
Press  of  the  people.  By  its  cheap  periodical  literature,  it  becomes 
all  things  to  them,  appealing  in  every  diversity  of  form,  to  their 
reason,  their  passions,  their  prejudices,  and  their  interests.  Any 
estimate  of  the  influence  of  the  periodical  press  that  should  leave 
out  this  large  superficies  of  the  reading  mind,  would  be  as  faulty 
as  the  survey  of  such  a  city  as  Edinburgh  which,  while  embracing 
the  Princes  and  George  Streets,  overlooked  the  Cannongates 
and  Cowgates. 

We  are  not  insensible  to  the  vast  amount  of  healing  influences 
that  proceed  from  the  periodical  press.  The  river  of  the  water  of 
life  is  pouring  forth  a  rich  supply  through  various  channels  opened 
U])  by  this  agency.  But  statistical  facts  go  to  prove  that  the  chan- 
nels, in  which  flow  the  poisonous  streams,  are  yet  more  numerous, 
and  that  the  supply  is  inucli  more  abundant.  The  periodical 
press  has  expanded  prodigiously  within  the  last  twenty  or  thirty 
years,  and  the  expansion  on  the  side  of  evil  has  greatly  prepon- 
derated over  that  on  the  side  of  good.  No  one  doubts  that  this  has 
been  the  case  in  France.  "  In  our  important  periodical  literature," 
said  Pastor  Boucher,  w^hen  starting  a  daily  Protestant  paper  in 
Paris  a  few  years  ago,  "  the  first  angle  is  occupied  by  iniidelity 
in  its  various  shapes'— indifference,  materialism,  scepticism ;  the 
second  angle  belongs  to  Roman  Catholicism  ;  the  third,  the  Biblical 
angle,  has  remained  empty — we  must  fill  it  up."  The  newspaper 
press  occupies,  generally,  a  more  commanding  position,  and  a 
larger  place  in  the  literature  of  France  than  in  that  of  any  other 
European  country.  The  lower  classes  of  French  Society  are  much 
more  generally  engrossed  with  political  and  social  questions,  than 
the  same  classes  in  England.  The  public  journals  in  France,., 
accordingly,  pass  through  many  more  hands  than  they  do  with  us... 
Every  Frenchman  is  a  politician.  In  the  workshops  where  large 
numbers  of  men  are  gathered  together,  it  is  no  uncommon  thing  for 
one  artisan  to  read  the  paper  aloud  for  the  benefit  of  all.  The 
French  journals  command  some  of  the  first-rate  writers  in  the 
country,  and  the  pens  of  the  celebrated  novelist  and  of  the  dis- 
tinguished statesman  are  employed  in  their  pages.  But  their  in- 
fluence is,  for  the  most  part,  hostile  to  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  Some 
of  the  most  powerful  Parisian  Jom'nals  are  perpetually  wavering 
from  Piomanism  to  Voltairianism,  and  from  Voltairianism  to  Pvo- 


262  THE    PKESS. 

manism.  The  "  Constitutionnel,"  at  the  time  when  its  circulation 
was  the  largest  of  any  paper  in  France,  was  actively  putting  forth 
the  opinions  and  principles  of  the  infidel  chief*  And,  at  the  pre- 
sent moment,  when  priestly  pretensions  are  becoming  more  and 
more  arrogant,  the  infidelity  of  many  of  the  Journals  is  reviving. 

But  it  is  the  feiiilleton,  or  light  French  novel,  chapter  after 
chapter  of  which  appears  in  the  columns  of  the  daily  papers,  that 
constitutes  tlie  chief  attraction  of  the  journal  to  myriads  of  men 
and  women,  it  is  in  this  department  of  the  paper,  separated  from 
the  political  articles  and  mere  news  by  a  broad  line,  that  Dumas, 
Sand,  Eugene  Sue,  and  writers  of  such  stamp,  produce  each  their 
dozen  or  eighteen  volumes  of  tales,  yearly ;  the  tendency  of  which 
is  to  make  their  readers  anything  but  grave  and  thoughtful,  moral 
and  religious.  In  reading  lately  a  romance  of  the  last-named 
author,  with  a  view  of  giving  forth  an  impartial  judgment,  v/e 
seemed  to  be  wading  through  some  of  the  foulest  mud  that  ever  we 
met  with  in  cheap  literature ;  and  it  became  at  last  a  question 
with  us,  whether  we  were  justifiable  in  making  the  attempt.  And 
yet  no  volume  in  a  large  circulating  library  had  been  more  fre- 
quently handled  than  the  one  refeired  to.  In  the  feuilletons  of  the 
newspaper,  marriage  has  been  declaimed  against,  nauseous  love- 
stories  have  been  told,  the  poor  and  labouring  classes  have  been 
ex(!ited  against  the  rich  and  noble,  the  most  startling  pictures  of 
depravity  have  been  drawn,  the  most  Utopian  schemes  of  social 
amelioration  have  been  advocated,  the  most  sacred  facts  in  the 
Gospel  History  have  been  parodied,  and  the  bitterest  sarcasm  and 
mockery  have  been  thrown  upon  the  holiest  doctrines  of  religion.^ 
Millions  of  readers  of  French  papers,  in  and  out  of  France,  come 
day  after  day  under  the  influence  of  this  anti-Christian  agency. 
We  can  conceive  no  more  effectual  barrier  against  serious  thought 
or  religious  j^i'inciples,  and  no  more  effective  instrumentality  in 
perverting  jDublic  taste  and  morals,  than  these  nswspaper  romances. 
Of  these,  multitudes  are  republislied  in  our  own  country,  and,  in 
company  with  less  objectionable  things,  swell  the  tide  of  our  cheap 
literature. 

JNIatters,  in  this  respect,  are  much  the  same  in  Germany  as  ii? 
France.  Socialism,  with  its  various  conflicting  theories  and  broadly 
marked  irreligion,  the  romance,  whose  heroes  enjbody  every  cha- 
racteristic except  the  Christian  and  the  human,  have  everywhere 
possessed  themselves,  to  a  considerable  extent,  of  the  Periodical 
Press ;  and  through  this  channel  have  deluged  with  a  flood  of  im- 

*  British  Qnarterlv,  No.  6  (.Journalism  in  France). 

+  M  Alexandre  Dumas,  a  wviter  who  panders  to  the  public  taste,  however  viti- 
ated, for  the  sake  of  money,  has  been  publishiucf  for  some  time  a  romance  of  a 
most  profane  character  in  the  columns  of  the  Comtitutio7inel  —  a.  daily  paper,  said 
to  be  circulating  at  the  rate  of  from  30,030  to  40,000.  The  immoral  tendency  of 
the  romance  has  been  so  glaring,  that  its  publication  has  been  checked  by  a  hint 
from  high  quarters. 


THE    PRESS.  203 

morality  and  irreiigion  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  land.  What 
John  Foster  once  said  of  the  socialist  publications  of  our  own 
country,  is  yet  more  truly  applicable  to  the  greater  proportion  of 
the  periodical  literature  of  the  Continental  Press.  "  The  thing 
seems  like  a  moral  epidemic,  breathed  from  hell,  destined  to  be 
permitted  for  a  time  to  sweep  a  portion  of  the  people  to  destruc- 
tion, in  defiance  of  all  remedial  interference."  Would  that  the 
remedial  interference  in  those  lands  were  but  as  powerful  as  with 
ourselves ! 

Our  own  periodical  press,   however,   is  employed  to   a   large 
extent  on  the  side  of  evil.     Unquestionable  statistics  have  shown 
this  to  be  the  case.     No  doubt,  as  the  tone  of  society  in  our  coun- 
try has  become  much   more  healthy    within   the  last  twenty  or 
thirty  years,  many  departments  of  the  periodical  press  have  parti- 
cipated in  the  favourable  reaction.     Some  journals  of  an  extensive 
circulation,   though  yet  far  from  being  what  they  ought  to   be, 
present  a  favourable  contrast  to  what  they  once  were.     Still,  the 
quantity  both  of  our  stamped  and  unstamped  periodical  literature 
jireponderates  greatly  on  tlie  anti-Christian  side.     In  this  estimate 
w^e  unhesitatingly  include  those  publications  which  pour  contempt 
on  the  Cin-istiau  Sabbath,  diverting  it  from  its  ordained  uses  as  a 
day  of  holy  rest  and  heavenly  training,  to  one  of  mere  bodily  relax- 
ation and  mental  diversion;   and  that  larger  class  which  would 
make  men  religious  without  any  regard  to  tlie  atonement  of  Christ 
and  the  influences  of  the  Spirit;  as  well  as  the  avowedly  infidel 
and  grossly  demoralising.     These  classes  combined  constitute  an 
amount  of  agency  in  conflict  witli  the  spirit  and  claims  of  the  Chris- 
tianity of  tlie  New  Testament,  of  greater  power  than  many  men 
are    apt  to   im'agine.      The    Edinburgh   Review,    which    is  not 
chargeable  vrith  countenancing  exaggerated  statements  in  these 
matters,    said,   about  two   years  ago,  "  the  total   annual  issue   of 
immoral  publications  has   been  stated    at  twenty-nine    millio'ns, 
being  more  than  the  total  issues  of  the  Society  for   Promoting 
Christian  Knowledge,  the  Pteligious  Tract  Society,  the  British  and 
Foreign  Bible  Society,  the  Scottish  Bible  Society,  the  Trinitarian 
Bible   Society,   and   some   seventy  religious    magazines."     More 
recently,  it  has  been  affirmed  that,  during  the  year  1851,  the  purely 
infidel  press  in  London  issued  publications  to  the  amount  of  more 
than  twelve  millions;  the  issues  of  avowed  atheism,  during  the 
same  period,  exceeded   six  hundred  and  forty  thousand ;  and,  in 
addition  to  these,  were  issued  upwards  of  seventeen  millions  and 
a  half  of  a  negative  or  corrupting  character.     All  this  is  exclusive 
of  what  are  properly  called  newspapers.     Indeed,  in  such  influential 
organs  as  the  Times,  the  Daily  News,  and  the  Morning  Chronicle, 
some  of  these  corrupt  periodical  issues  iiave  been  subjected  to  a 
withering  exposure. 

But  the  Newspaper  Press  cannot  be  altogether  exculpated.     It 


264  THE    PRESS. 

•Kas  shown,  but  a  few  years  ago,  that,  according  to  the  official 
stamp  returns  of  1843,  the  weekly  papers  which  had  the  lai'gest 
circulation,  were  of  an  irreligious  and  demoralizing  character.-^: 
Mr.  Bucknall,  in  his  evidence  before  the  select  committee  on  news- 
paper stamps,  in  May,  1851,  adverting  to  one  of  these,  now  some- 
what changed  in  its  character,  but  still  far  from  being  unobjec- 
tionable, said  that,  twenty  years  ago,  it  was  "  almost  a  blasphemous, 
scurrilous,  and  contemptible  paper,  but  with  an  enormous  circu- 
iation."  This  paper,  according  to  the  stamp  returns  of  1850,  has 
considerably  decreased  in  circulation  though  that  is  still  large  ; 
thus  showing  that  the  days  of  its  worst  character  were  the  days  of 
its  greatest  influence.  Another  of  these,  ministering  much  more 
to  the  sporting  than  to  the  moral  life,  and  tending  to  nourish  the 
ignoble  passions  of  man,  has  of  late  been  on  the  increase,  having 
had  an  issue  of  stamps  for  1850  amounting  to  considerably  more 
than  a  million  and  a  quarter.  While  a  third  paper,  circulating  at 
the  rate  of  about  thirteen  thousand  weekly,  openly  invades  the 
sanctities  of  the  Sabbath,  and  directs  men's  thoughts  anywhere  than 
to  things  above.  These  we  have  noted  as  of  a  demoralizing  ten- 
dency. But  how  many  possess  a  negative  characteristic,  saying 
little  or  nothing  for  or  against  the  cause  of  the  gospel.  It  has 
been  said  of  the  English  journal,  that  "  it  is  a  great  mental  camera, 
which  throws  a  picture  of  the  whole  world  upon  a  single  sheet  of 
paper."  And  yet,  with  a  few  noble  exceptions,  that  mental  camera 
either  gives  no  representation  of  the  Christian  world,  or  a  very 
( listorted  one ;  or  throws  forth  pictures,  the  direct  influence  of  which 
is  to  make  men  any  thing  but  Christians.  Of  the  seventy  millions 
of  newspapers  which,  ]Mr.  Dickens,  in  his  HousehQld  Words,  says, 
pass  through  all  the  post-ofiices  every  year,  from  how  many  could 
we  gather  any  thing  like  an  account  of  the  working  of  the  most 
beneficent  of  all  agencies  in  the  world — the  missionary  enterprise? 
Indeed,  from  many  of  our  public  journals,  a  man  could  scarcely 
inter  that  there  was  such  a  thing  as  Christianity  in  the  earth ;  and 
to  a  good  man  it  were  a  melancholy  thought,  did  the  actual  world 
contain  no  better  elements  of  regeneration  than  are  represented  to 
us  by  the  greater  bulk  of  the  newspaper  press. 

But  it  is  in  the  reading  for  the  million  —  the  cheap  unstampe<^ 
publications  —  that  we  find  the  greatest  amount  of  infidel  and 
demoralizing  influences.  Mr.  Knight,  the  respectable  publisher  in 
rieet-street,  stated,  not  long  ago,  "During  the  last  five  years, 
while  cheap  religious  periodicals  have  made  limited  progress, 
either  in  numbers  or  interest,  the  corrupt  printing-press  has  been 
unceasingly  at  work.  The  present  circulation  in  London  of 
immoral  unstamped  publications  of  a  half-penny  to  thi'ee-half- 
pence  each,  must  be  upwards  of  400,000  weekly,  which  would  give 

*  The  Power  of  the  Press  (18-17). 


THE    PEESS.  265 

the  enormous  issue  of  20,800,000  j^early !  In  addition  to  these 
there  is  the  weekly  importation  of  French  prints  and  novels,  of  so 
indecent  a  character,  that  once  they  could  only  be  obtained  by 
stealth,  but  may  now  be  purchased  openly  from  any  vendors  of  the 
other  periodicals,"  To  a  large  proportion  of  this  literature  for  the 
people  might  be  applied  the  language  which  Burke  applied  to  the 
Frenchpapers  of  his  time: — "  The  writers  of  these  papers,  indeed, 
for  the  gi-eater  part,  are  either  unknown  or  in  contempt ;  but  they 
are  like  a  battery,  in  which  the  stroke  of  any  one  ball  produces  no 
greatimpression,  but  the  amount  of  continual  repetition  is  decisive." 

We  may  classify  the  anti-Christian  cheap  literature  thus  :— 
There  is,  first,  the  avowedly  infidel.  Publications  of  this  class  are 
circulating,  at  an  extremely  cheap  rate,  among  the  artisans  in  our 
lai-ge  towns,  the  object  of  which,  in  the  language  of  one  of  them 
(the  recognised  organ  of  the  secularist  party  in  London  and  the 
provinces),  is  to  induce  the  people  "to  shake  off  religious  belief — 
to  cut  the  cable  by  which  theology  has  a  hold  on  practical  affairs, 
and  to  let  theology  float  away  to  the  undefined  future  to  which  it 
belongs."  Instead  of  finding  much  calm  and  fair  reasoning  in 
this  organ,  as  the  title  would  lead  us  to  expect,  we  have  the  old 
dishonest  trick,  so  much  resorted  to  by  Paine,  of  vilifying  Chris- 
tianity by  identifying  it  with  its  corruptions  ;  and  the  usual  kind 
and  quantity  of  raillery  aimed  at  anxious  enquirers  and  praying 
men  and  women,  the  only  excuse  for  which  is  that  such  weapons 
are  more  easily  wielded  against  the  religion  of  Christ  than  argu- 
ments. ''Excelsior !"  is  surely  an  ii-onical  motto  for  an  oracle 
which  forbids  us  to  look  up  to  the  skies  and  beyond  the  stars;  and 
which  eujoins  us  to  let  God  and  futurity  alone  as  we  have  no  irre- 
sistible evidence  in  proof  of  either.  Most  unquestionably,  the 
motto  should  have  been — "  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we 
die."  Were  the  mischief  produced  by  such  publications  only  pro- 
portionate to  the  talent  displayed  in  them,  they  might  be  allowed 
to  pass  on  unnoticed  to  the  oblivion  to  which  they  are  hastening. 
But  it  is  not  so.  Their  sentiments  find  a  welcome  response  in 
many  minds  that  have  remained  indifferent  or  hostile  to  the  Gospel 
of  Christ ;  and,  in  workshops  and  factories,  they  have  done  no 
inconsiderable  amount  of  evil.  An  atheistic  secularism,  at  the 
present  day,  is  wielding,  with  renewed  vigour,  the  penny  periodical 
press ;  and,  by  this  means,  is  endeavouring  to  leaven  the  people, 
especially  in  manufacturing  districts,  with  its  earthy  principles. 

The  second  class  may  be  distinguished  as  j^olluting.  Publica- 
tions of  this  class  pander  to  the  sicldiest  curiosity  and  the  basest 
passions.  Vice  is  here  tricked  out  in  all  its  alluring  attire.  The 
reader  is  conducted  through  some  of  the  dissolute  scenes  of  fashion- 
able life,  or  his  sympathies  are  enlisted  in  favour  of  some  desperado 
who  has  been  the  hero  of  the  den,  and  whose  hair-breadth  escapes 


205  THE    PP.ESS. 

have  tlirown  an  air  of  romance  around  his  Hfe  of  crime  and  infamy. 
I'he  readers  of  tliis  class  of  poUuting  puhUoations  are  mnch  more 
numerous  than  the  former.  They  address  themselves  to  tlie  lowest 
of  the  people,  demand  not  the  least  eiibrt  of  thought,  aud  are  ever 
hot  with  stirriug  scenes  and  incidents.  Among  the  myriads  of 
young  men  and  women  in  the  metropolis  who  are  able  to  read,  but 
who  seldom  or  never  a})pear  in  the  house  of  God,  this  low,  cor- 
rupiing  literature  has  a  very  large  circulation.  "  If  you  go,"  said 
Mr.  Bucknall  before  the  select  committee  on  newspaper  stamps, 
"  into  some  of  what  we  call  the  back  slums,  and  diiierent  places 
both  in  London  and  in  provincial  towns,  you  will  see  very  often 
shops  oi)en  on  the  Sunday  mornhig.  Those  are  out  of  the  general 
reach  of  observation  ;  and  unless  you  go  there  and  positively 
watch  the  sale,  it  is  impossible  that  you  can  have  any  idea  of  the 
amount  of  moral  depravity  of  these  things."  jNIr.  jNlayhew,  in  his 
instructive  work,  entitled  "  London  Labour  and  the  London  Poor," 
has  made  some  startling  disclosures  in  reference  to  tlie  literature 
of  the  masses.  Speaking  of  the  costermongers — a  class  number- 
ing about  30,000,  living  '-in  a  state  of  almost  brutish  ignorance" 
• — he  says,  "What  ihey  love  best  to  listen  to — and,  indeed,  what 
they  are  most  eager  for — are  Eeynolds'  periodicals,  especially  the 
"  Mysteries  of  the  Court."  One  street-seller  assured  him  that  iiis 
master  alone  ''  used  to  get  rid  of  10,000  copies  of  Kuch  works  on 
a  Saturday  night  and  a  Sunday  morning;"*  —  the  principal  cus- 
tomers being  young  men.  Mr.  Abel  Heywood  of  Manchester, 
through  whose  hands  jtass  about  ten  ^^er  cent,  of  these  cheap  pub- 
lications— sujjplying  the  surrounding  towns  to  tiie  extent  of  twenty 
miles — has  sliown,  in  his  evidence  before  the  select  committee, 
that  the  circulation  of  the  penny  vitiating  periodicals  among  the 
nianuJactuiing  distiicts  is  very  large.  And  one  or  two  works  of 
this  kind,  we  are  informed,  meet  with  a  readier  sale  in  Edinburgh 
than  almost  any  other  cheap  publication.  To  this  corru^^t  class  of 
reading  must  also  be  assigned  the  '•  gallows  "  literature.  The  ap- 
petite for  this,  especially  among  the  reading  poor,  is  enormous. 
The  morbid  leoling  about  criminals  has,  of  late  years,  been  strong; 
and  the  press — even  that  which  claims  to  be  respectable — has,  by 
its  pictorial  iilusirations,  and  minute  details  of  criminal  deeds, 
hirgely  ministered  to  it.  It  is  stated  that  no  less  than  four  millions 
aud  a  half  of  broadsheets,  relating  to  two  late  principal  executions, 
were  })riuted  and  got  up  in  London,  and  sold  throughout  the 
country.  The  chief  way  to  check  or  counteract  the  iniiuence  of 
this  pernicious  trash,  is,  as  Mr.  Mayhew  hints,  in  the  "  resj^ectable" 
])ress  becoming  a  more  healthful  public  iubtructor.  In  all  this 
penny  literature,  we  have  an  agency  v>hich,like  an  army  of  locusts, 

*  Loudon  Labour  aad  '.lie  Loudon  Poor,  vol.  i.  pp.  25,  290. 


THE    PilESS. 


26T 


eats  up  all  that  is  healthful  wherever  it  alights,  and  leaves  nothing 
heliind  but  pollution  and  desolation.  =:= 

There  is  a  third  class  which,  in  regard  to  moral  and  religious 
influences,  may  be  called  latitudinarian.  In  this  class  we  have 
none  of  the  broadly-marked  and  openly-avowed  intidelity  of  the 
first,  nor  any  of  the  grossly  depraved  and  deeply  polluthig  scenes 
of  the  second.  light  reading,  in  the  shape  of  novels  and  ro- 
mances, is  tlie  staple  commodity;  and  this  of  a  kind  calculated 
to  make  men  and  women  anything  but  wise  and  thougbtful ;  wbile 
(in  tlie  way  of  warp  and  woof),  threads  of  thought,  connected  with 
religious  indifferentism  or  a  false  liberalism,  y\\\\  throughout. 
This  class  of  cheap  literature  is  a  large  and  growing  one.  and  seems, 
in  many  places,  to  be  supplanting,  in  a  great  extent,  publi- 
cations of  a  decidedly  immoral  kind.  To  this  class  belongs  the 
''  Family  Herald,"  a  miscellaneous  joiu-nal,  which  is  said  to  have 
the  largest  sale  of  any  of  tlie  penny  or  cheap  publications  among 
the  worldng  classes.  The  weekly  circulation  of  this  pennyworth, 
as  stated  in  evidence  before  the  select  committee  relerred  to,  is 
more  than  two  himdred  thousand.  Of  these,  somewhere  about 
fourteen  thousand  circulate  weekly  in  Manchester  and  the  ueigh- 
bourhood.  "  There  is  a  peculiarity  about  the  '  Family  Herald,' "  said 
the  extensive  Manchester  bookseller  in  his  evidence  ;  "  it  addresses  it- 
self to  the  fairer  sex  in  a  great  measure,  and  to  that  perhaps  may  be 
attributed  its  very  large  circulation."  It  has,  however,  "  facts  and 
philosophy  for  gentlemen,"  as  well  as  "hints  and  entertainment 
for  ladies."  Not  the  least  engrossing  part  of  this  "  domestic  ma- 
gazine," as  the  "  Herald"  itself  testifies,  and  as  we  know  from 
observation,  is  the  large  space  devoted  to  replies  to  correspondents. 
The  useful  and  the  ludicrous  here  meet.  These  we  let  pass. 
They  may  be  "interesting  to  all — ofi'ensive  to  none."  But  re- 
ligious doubts  are  here  solved,  and  interpretations  of  Scripture  are 
here  given ;  and  thus,  through  the  channel  in  which  flows  the  ex:- 
hilarating  beverage,  runs  also  the  diluted  poison.  The  "  Family 
Herald's"  brief  "  discourse  on  matters  pertaining  to  religion,"  is 
more  akin  to  the  sentiments  of  Theodore  Parker  than  to  those  of 
Christ  and  His  apostles.     Man's  original  uprightness  is  here  de- 

*  The  "  Christian  Times,"  .=;peaking  of  the  "  Acherontic  Shades  of  the  Metropo- 
lis," and  especially  of  those  "  normal  schools  of  vice  and  profligacy  in  London — 
the  low  theatres,  ""says  :  "  Of  the  penny  theatres,  the  abused  power  of  the  press 
is  the  maiii,  if  not  tlie  sole  cause.  In  none  of  these  houses  is  the  histrionic  lite- 
rature of  the  more  decent  school  represented,  :or  the  obvious  reason  that  it  is 
not  sufficiently  prurient.  The  songs,  the  dramas,  and  the  farces  of  the  Holywell 
Street  and  the  Ilevnolds  Schools  are  exclusively  used  at  the  penny  theatres. 
Instead  of  Richard  the  Tliird,  Hotspur,  Wolsey.  Catherine  of  Arrayon,  Oliver 
Cromuell,  and  ideal  personages  of  the  modern  drama,  we  only  find  Jack  Shep- 
panl,  Turpin,  Carew,  Tom  Shingle,  Rush,  Mrs.  IManuing,  and  others,  who  have 
risen  above  the  ordinary  heroes  of  the  Xewi/ate  Cah-ndar!  ami  these  are  neither 
exhibited  to  elicit  the  self-delusions  or  the  certain  penalties  of  crime,  hut  to  ex- 
cite compassion  for  the  criminal,  or  to  smother  all  possible  reflections  by  termi- 
n  .ting  a  tragedy  with  a  grimace." — Christian  Times,  Nov.  23,  1850. 


268  THE   PRESS. 

iiiecl:  non-responsibility  for  belief  is  inculcated;  tbe  salvation  of 
the  whole  race  without  any  exception  is  preached ;  and  to  speak 
of  future  punishment,  or  of  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  is  repre- 
sented as  making  a  sort  of  Moloch  of  God.  No  wonder  then  that 
Pollock's  divine  poem  is  condemned  for  its  Calvinistic  theology, 
and  that  Madame  George  Sand's  works  are  represented  as  the 
works  of  "  a  very  religious  writer."  No  wonder  that  doctrinal 
creeds  are  made  very  lightly  of,  that  Scotch  Sabbaths  are  hated, 
and  that  "  conventicles"  are  shunned  for  their  fanaticism.  These, 
we  presume,  are  some  of  the  "facts  and  philosophy  for  gentle- 
men." No  doubt  they  are  meant  also  for  the  "  ladies,"  to  whom 
"  hints  and  entertainment"  of  a  different  kind  are  given  ;  as  well 
as  for  the  "youth,"  for  whom  "questions  and  diversions"  are 
provided.  The  "  Herald  "  is  not  unfrequently  spoken  of  as  the 
most  respectable  penny  periodical  of  its  class —  and  it  is  respect- 
able compared  with  much  of  the  cheap  literature  circulating  along- 
side of  it.  But  here  lies  the  danger.  Many  a  domestic  circle  that 
would  justly  repel  the  organ  of  an  atheistic  secularism,  or  the 
grossly  immoral  trash  of  the  Reynolds'  school,  because  their  irre- 
ligion  is  too  palpable,  admit  the  "Herald "for  its  "recreation 
and  harmless  pastime,"  while  they  receive  along  with  it  (knowingly 
or  vniknowingly)  the  teachings  of  an  infidel  theology.  By  all 
means  let  us  have  cheap  "  domestic  magazines  of  usefid  inform- 
ation and  amusement ;  but  let  parents  and  guardians  and  churches 
see  to  it  that  their  "facts  and  philosophy," as  well  as  their  "hints" 
and  "  diversions,"  are,  at  least,  in  harmony  with  the  genial  and 
ennobling  teaching  of  the  Book  of  God.  Such,  we  regret  to  say, 
is  not  the  case  with  the  "  Family  Herald."  =:' 

Lastly,  comes  a  class  whose  name  is  legion — a  class  which  is 
not  in  open  conflict  with  Christianity,  like  the  first ;  nor  glaringly 

*  Our  "  Family  Herald  "  says,  "  The  passages  which  speak  of  the  salvation  of 
all  men  arc  very  numerous.  There  is  one  wliich  expressly  asserts  the  salvation 
of  intidels."  And  if  our  fii-e-side  companions  should  think  this  too  good  news  to 
he  true,  they  are  referred  to  Eoin.  xi.  .32  for  proof!!  "The  salvation  of  the 
Scripture,"  says  this  domestic  teacher,  "is  a  bodily  salvation  on  the  earth,  in 
which  men  will  eat  bread  and  drink  wine,  and  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  corporeal 
existence.  Philosophy  has  chnnged  all  this,  and  we  hear  almost  nothing  of  it. 
What  can  the  clergy  be  about  ?"  And  then  follows  an  admiralde  text-proof,  which 
Paul  himself  certainly  never  thought  of:  "Is  not  the  Head  of  the  Church  called 
*  the  Saviour  of  the  body  ?'  "  I !  Here  is  another  lesson  :  "  A  man  is  responsible  for 
his  false  or  bad  faith.. just  as  he  is  responsible  for  his  bad  breath.  It  is  his  mis- 
foitune."  To  this  Messrs.  Emerson,  Owen,  and  Holyoake  will  have  no  objec- 
tion. "  Every  world,"  we  are  told,  "  has  no  doubt  its  own  incarnation,  and  these 
are  all  one  incarnation  :  and  we,  being  many,  are  part  of  it,  etc."  This  is  some- 
thing like  pantheism.  "  Sinceiuty  wants  to  know  if  it  be  possible  to  obtain  tlie 
old  faith  in  God  that  v.-rought  miracles  ?"  And  ihe  "  Herald"  insinuates  that  "  the 
two  facts  of  faith  and  mesmerism  combined"  are  to  work  wonders.  Another  will 
suffice: — An  "  Unleaknkd  Person"  enquires  about  the  heathen,  and  he  is  told 
"  Scripture  being  a  universal  revelation  by  a  Universal  Spirit — when  it  says  the 
heath(-n  are  lost.it  means  that  they  all  are  finally  gathered  into  the  universallsrael 
—  lost  by  ceasing  to  be  heathen."  Do  not  such  sentiments  justify  us,  then,  in  class 
ing  among  evil  instructors  the  "  Family  Herald  ?  " 


THE    PRESS.  209 

vicious  and  immoral,  like  the  second;  nor  gives  forth  loose  religious 
views  with  its  entertainments,  like  the  third  ;  hut  which  aims  at 
making  men  moral,  irrespective  of  the  great  essential  doctrines  of 
the  gospel.  Works  of  this  class  pass  hy  Christianity  in  silent 
contempt,  falsely  exalt  human  nature,  and  endeavour  to  keep  it  in- 
dependent of  divine  spiritual  aids.  This  class  of  cheap  literature 
sins  in  the  way  of  defect  rather  than  m  positive  statements.  John 
von  Miiller,  an  illustrious  German  scholar  and  historian,  said  of 
Herder's  Philosophy  of  History,  "  I  find  every  thing  there  but 
Christ,  and  what  is  the  history  of  the  world  without  Christ?" 
In  the  periodicals  referred  to,  we  find  almost  every  thing  hut 
Christ;  and  what  is  all  the  moral  instruction  in  the  world  with' 
out  Christ?  These  publications  avowedly  aim  in  their  teaching, 
not  only  to  increase  men's  information,  but  to  make  them  better 
and  happier.  This  is  the  grand  design  for  which  Christianity  was 
given  to  the  world.  It  claims  to  be  the  only  system  of  truth  cap- 
able of  thoroughly  regenerating  the  human  race.  This  claim  is 
substantiated  by  an  appeal  not  only  to  its  own  principles,  but  to 
what  the  world  has  been  without  it,  and  to  what  it  has  done  for 
communities  and  individuals.  Surely  then  the  moral  teaching  of 
the  periodical,  as  well  the  moral  teaching  of  the  living  preacher, 
that  takes  up  a  neutral  position  with  regard  to  Chi-istianity,  must 
be  construed  into  virtual  hostility.  It  may  be  said  of  the  one,  as 
it  has  been  said  of  the  other,  that  it  is  merely  aping  Epictetus, 
"We  do  not  want  the  literature  on  which  we  are  commenting  ser- 
monized, nor  to  be  taken  up  with  theological  controversies;  but 
we  want  in  it  a  distinct  recognition  of  the  fact  that  distinctively 
Christian  elements  are  alone  efficacious  in  radically  regenerating 
the  world.  The  Great  Teacher  has  said  —  and  the  remark  is 
peculiarly  applicable  to  moral  teaching — "He  that  is  not  with  me 
is  against  mc." 

In  the  above  classes  of  the  j-teople's  literature  combined,  were  a 
mighty  agency  adverse  to  spiritual  Christianity,  even  though  the 
Christianized  periodical  literature  were  greater  or  equal  in  amount 
to  it.  But  how  fearfully  eflective  must  be  that  agency,  week  after 
week,  and  year  after  year,  when  the  circulation  of  the  antidote  is 
so  utterly  disproportionate  to  tlie  circulation  of  the  poison. 

It  has  happened,  to  a  considerable  extent,  with  the  press,  as  it 
has  done  with  some  of  the  lands  of  the  lieformation.  The  dark- 
ness has  invaded  and  driven  back  the  light.  Komish  superstition 
has  multiplied  her  altars  greatly  more  than  an  Evangelical  Pro- 
testantism has  lengthened  her  cords  and  strengthened  her  stakes. 
The  press,  by  which  we  won  our  liberties  and  multiplied  our 
Bibles,  though  powerfully  employed  on  the  side  of  good,  is  yet,  in 
many  departments,  more  powerfully  em})loyed  on  the  side  of  evil. 
The  church  is  only  becoming  awake  to  the  great  preponderance 
ou  the  wrong  side     We  have  been  looking  too  exclusively  to  the 


270  THE    PRESS. 

multitndinons  streams  of  healing  influences  that  have  been  flowing 
foith  in  many  directions.  We  have  dwelt  too  complacently  on 
our  large  Bible  issues,  on  our  Tract  Society  grants,  on  the  number 
and  extensive  circulation  of  our  religious  periodicals,  and  on  the 
many  other  productions  of  sterling  worth  that  are  ever  and  anon 
issuing  from  the  press.  These  numerous  and  powerful  instrumen- 
talities for  good  have  dazzled  our  eyes,  so  as  to  have  concealed 
very  much  from  our  view  the  strong  and  numerous  currents  of 
evil  that  are  flowing  visibly  on  the  surface,  and  more  secretly, 
though  not  the  less  effectually,  underneath.  But  to  be  awake  to 
an  evil,  is  half  overcoming  it;  and  patriotic  Christian  men,  in  our 
own  country  and  on  the  Continent,  are  aiming  at  making  a  much 
more  vigorous  use  of  the  press. 

Some  of  our  old  influential  organs  have,  of  late  years,  without 
losing  any  thing  of  their  ability,  decidedly  improved  in  tone  and 
spirit.  "While  others,  both  in  the  review  and  magazine  depart- 
ments, have  begun  a  vigorous  course  in  opposition  to  infidel 
errors,  and  on  the  side  of  Gospel  truth.  Of  the  former,  we  need 
only  notice  the  Edinburgh  Review,  whose  appearance  marked  an 
era  in  our  liigher  periodical  literature,  and  which  has  exerted  a 
strong  influence  on  public  opinion.  At  the  time  when  the 
"Quarterly"  entered  the  field  as  its  yix-aX,  i\\Q  Northern  Journal 
is  said  to  have  had  a  cii-culation  of  about  nine  thousand.  It  is 
well  known,  however,  that  Christian  missions  were  assailed,  and 
sceptical  o]iinions  found  favour  in  many  of  the  papers  in  its  early 
numbers,  and  when  its  influence  was  so  great.  But  for  a  number 
of  years,  this  powerful  organ  has  done  much  effective  service  on 
tlie  ]-isht  side.  And  while  IMacaulay  has  been  enriching  its  pages 
with  his  brilliant  and  healthy  literary  criticisms,  such  men  as  Sii- 
James  Stephen  and  Mr.  Henry  Eogers  have  been  more  directly, 
and  with  great  power,  asserting  the  principles  of  the  Kcformation 
against  Komanism  and  Puseyism,  and  the  claims  of  an  historical 
Cln-istianity  against  German  and  English  rationalism.  The  re- 
prints of  these  writers  are  among  the  most  valuable  contributions 
to  our  modern  literature. 

In  some  of  the  younger  quarterlies"'-  and  monthlies,  which  have 
been  called  forth  by  the  aggressions  of  Bomanism  on  the  one 
hand,  and  of  Infidelity  on  the  other,  we  find  men  of  might  and  of 
a  right  spirit  doing  valiantly  lor  the  truth.  And  their  influence 
has  not  unfrcquen'tly  stricken  the  camp  of  the  enemy  with  dismay. 

it  should  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  while  such  period- 
icals arc  battling  with,  and  affording  a  strong  counteractive  to, 
that  vague  ])hiloso])hical  theism  which,  in  numerous  ways,  appeals 
to  the  uiddling  and  higlier  classes,  there  is  a  wide  lower  range  of 
mind  which  the  cheap  anti-Christian  literature  especially  addresses 

*  The  British  Quarterly  and  tlie  North  British  Rcricw  deserve  special  notice. 


THE    PRESS.  271 

—  a  range  of  mind  which  tlie  massive  qnarterly  or  monthly  does 
not  reach ;  and  it  is  here  chiefly  that  we  lack  a  sufficiently  apt 
force  to  coiniteract  the  enemy.  The  prohlera  —  how  to  siip])ly  the 
masses  with  acceptable  and  yet  wholesome  and  elevating  reading 

—  has  never  yet  been  actually  and  fully  wrought  out.  Philan- 
thropic men,  in  endeavouring  to  meet  the  evil,  have  generally 
erred  in  one  of  two  ways.  They  have  either  gone  to  the  extreme 
of  bringing  purely  religious  publications,  in  tlie  form  of  tracts  or 
biographies,  to  bear  upon  the  popular  mind  that  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  the  dangerous  romance;  or  they  have  gone  to  the  ex- 
treme of  merely  diffusing  useful  information,  and  of  aiming  to 
make  men  moral  with  little  or  nothing  of  the  evangelical  element. 
Both  courses  have,  in  a  great  measure,  failed.  The  former  has 
been  like  casting  pearls  before  swine.  The  latter  has  been  the 
effort  of  men  to  draw  water  out  of  a  well,  while  they  had  nothing 
to  di-aw  with. 

The  Pteligious  Tract  Society,  which  all  good  men  love,  as  if  con- 
scious that  something  more  was  needed  to  meet  the  condition  of 
the  masses  than  the  religious  tract  or  narrative,  has,  by  the  issue 
of  the  monthly  volume,  taken  a  step  in  the  right  direction  —  a 
scheme  which  has  Arnold's  language  for  its  motto,  "  i  never 
wanted  articles  on  religious  subjects  half  so  much  as  articles  on 
common  subjects,  written  with  a  decidedly  Christian  tone."  It 
has  too  much  been  forgotten  that  the  peo[)le  will  have  entertaining 
literature.  It  is  by  entertaining  literature  of  a  de])raved  kind  that 
the  evil  is  wrought,  and  it  must  be  by  entertaining  literature  of  a 
healthy  Christian  tone  that  the  evil  must  be  counteracted.  This 
counteractive  influence  is  especially  needed  in  reference  to  the 
weekly  penny  publications.  It  is  from  this  stronghold  that  the 
enemy  brings  his  demoralizing  energies  to  bear  upon  the  masses. 
It  seems  that  within  the  last  two  years,  not  less  than  two  hundi'ed 
new  penny  periodicals  have  started  into  existence,  the  greater 
part  of  which  are  more  influential  for  evil  than  for  good.  These 
can  only  be  met  and  counteracted  by  penny  weekly  ])eriodicals 
combining  instruction  and  entertainment,  and  which  shall  have 
the  effect  of  elevating  the  working  classes  in  the  scale  of  moral 
being.  Some  weekly  penny-worths  (the  "  Leisure  Hoin-,"  for  ex- 
ample) realize,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  the  kind  of  influence 
referred  to.  Let  such  approximate  still  nearer  to  the  model  tlmt 
has  often  been  indicated,  let  the  number  of  such  be  multii)lied, 
and  let  good  men  employ  a  like  energy  in  disseminating  their 
cheap  good  things  as  bad  men  employ  in  disseminating  their 
cheap  bad  tilings. 

The  Alessrs.  Chambers,  whose  Edinburgh  Journal  has  an  im- 
mense circulation  throughout  the  kingdom,  have  succeeded,  to  a 
very  considerable  extent,  in  disseminating  sound  and  useful  mforni- 
ation  among  the  people.    Yet  they  complain  o^'  not  having  influ- 


272  THE    PRESS. 

enced  the  masses  who  are  poUuted  by  those  Grab-street  produc- 
tions, which  are  the  scum  and  disgrace  of  our  literature.  In  the 
Minutes  of  Evidence  taken  before  the  Select  Committee  on  News- 
paper Stamps,  it  is  stated  that  the  publications  which  have  been 
brought  out  at  a  cheap  rate,  originally  under  the  plea  of  benefiting 
the  working  classes,  such  as  the  "Penny  Magazine,"  "Chambers' 
Journal,"  etc.,  have  missed  their  aim,  and  have  been  generally  cir- 
culated among  the  middle  classes.  In  Chambers'  publications,  we 
miss  the  evangelical  element  —  that  decidedly  Christian  tone  — 
which  Dr.  Arnold  wished  to  give  to  the  Useful  Knowledge  Society's 
works,  and  especially  to  the  Penny  Magazine,  which  was  circu- 
lating at  the  rate  of  a  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  copies  weekly. 
"  Prudence,"  says  a  reviewer  *  of  our  Popular  Serial  Literature, 
"is  Chambers'  favourite  theme  and  darling  virtue.  It  is  the  aim 
of  all  his  moral  instruction.  Right  feeling,  correct  ethics,  and 
'enlightened  selfdove,'  are  not  only  the  highest  principles  tov*Iiich 
he  appeals,  but  seem  to  be  so  appealed  to  as  to  leave  no  room  for 
reference  to  a  higher  standard.  It  does  not,  as  all  professed  instruc- 
tion ought  to  do,  point  upward."  He  justly  adds,  "let  our  lightest 
literature  preserve  the  standard  of  Coleridge's  'Commendable  Pru- 
dence,' sanctioning  no  principle  which  the  word  of  God  condemns 
— if  vice  be  portrayed,  let  our  impression  of  it  be,  'there  is  no 
peace  to  the  wicked.'  But  let  our  professedly  didactic  works  exliibit 
the  '  Wise  Prudence'  of  Coleridge  —  aim  at  a  higher  standard  of 
principle,  if  not  distinctly  religious,  tending  toward^  religion  and 
kept  in  harmony  with  it ;  and  we  should  have  a  fairer  hope  of 
reaching  and  moving  the  lowest  of  our  people." 

The  church  has  powerful  resources,  in  the  form  of  talent  and 
wealth,  at  her  command,  which  need  only  lay  hold  more  vigor- 
ously on  the  Periodical  Press,  in  order  to  drive  back  the  darkness 
of  infidel  error,  and  carry  forth  triumphantly  the  light  of  Gospel 
truth.  Would  that  the  men  of  sanctified  intellect,  the  princes  in 
Israel,  devoted  their  energies  to  a  larger  extent  in  giving  us  a 
Christianly  baptized  periodical  literature,  and  that  Christian  men 
of  wealth  were  to  expend  much  larger  sums  in  extending  and  ren- 
diSring  more  efficient  a  cheap  instructive  religious  press!  The 
newspaper,  the  twopenny  and  penny  journal,  v.-ithout  being  exclu- 
sively devoted  to  religious  subjects,  or  anything  like  sermonized, 
must,  in  their  spirit  and  aim,  be  Christianized.  Along  with  a 
goodly  number  of  works  in  sacred  literature  issuing  ever  and  anon 
from  the  press,  in  the  form  of  doctrinal  and  practical  treatises, 
and  religious  biographies,  we  must  have  our  little  and  large  books 
of  science,  our  cheapest  as  well  as  our  high-priced  periodicals,  our 
journals  which  treat  of  common  things  and  the  engrossing  topics 
of  the  day,  as  well  as  those  which  are  taken  up  with  the  philo- 

•  North  Britisli. 


THE    CLUBS.  273 

sophical  essay,  leavened  tlirougbout  witli  the  principles  of  Christian 
truth.  One  of  tlie  most  gi'aphic  and  widely-circulated  histories 
that  have  proceeded  Irom  the  modern  press,  as  we  have  ah-eady 
noticed,  is  written  on  the  principle  of  exhibiting  God  in  history  — 
a  principle  whicli  Robertson  had  almost  forgotten,  and  to  wbich 
Hume  and  Gibbon  were  opposed.  And  wlien  the  principle  of 
seeing  God  in  every  thing  —  a  ]>rinci])le  as  remote  from  a  v.igue 
dreamy  pantheism  as  from  a  cold  lifeless  natiiralism — is  recog- 
nised in  every  department  of  our  literature,  ^oth  in  that  v;liich 
circulates  among  tbe  middle  and  higher  classes  »,"  society,  and  in 
that  which  runs  throughout  the  lower  masses  —  tlie  ])ress  will  be 
consecrated  wholly  to  the  grand  end  for  which  God  gave  it;  be 
omnipotent  on  the  side  of  truth  and  righteousness  ;  and,  like  the 
bells  of  the  horses.'  and  the  pots  in  Jerusalem  and  in  Judah,  have 
inscribed  upon  it,  HOLINESS  UNTO  THE  LOUD. 


CHAPTER  IL 

THE    CLUBS. 

The  present  pre-eminently  an  npre  of  associations — Amount  of  sucli  instrument- 
ality on  the  side  of  truth  —  This  often  blinds  us  to  existing  agencies  foi-  evil  — 
These  advance  under  different  shields  —  Charge  brought  aLiainst  mauy  literary 
and  philosophical  associations  —  Infidelity  of  the  Socialist  clubs  —  Those  of 
France  in  1789  And  1848  —  Still  strong  in  their  irreligious  influences  though  sup- 
pressed by  law  —  Hegelianisni  of  the  German  clubs  —  Resorts  of  the  travelling 
jour,  eymen — S\vitz-rla;id  —  Sitlutary  changes  in  Continental  institutions  de- 
feated by  such  irreligious  and  revolutionary  associations — Infidel  associations 
in  England  —  Existing  secularist  societies  —  Clubs  of  f  ireign  workmen  in  Lon- 
don—  InfidelUy  most  prevalent  in  trades  that  admit  of  most  intercourse  — 
Excellence  of  existing  counteractive  and  aggressive  Christian  agencies  —  Neeil 
of  a  specific  agiUK^v  for  meeting  the  infidelity  of  our  artizans  —  Wichern  and  the 
German  Inner  Mission — Coniereaces  oa  true  Christianity  at  Paris. 

The  present  age  is  characterized  by  the  number  and  variety  of  its 
cTSsociations.  Never  was  the  maxim,  that  union  is  strength,  so 
generally  acted  upon.  Projects  hearing  upon  man's  social  and 
moral  condition  are  no  sooner  hinted  at,  than  societies  are  or- 
ganized for  developing  and  executing  them.  It  is  pre-eminently 
an  age  of  combination  for  the  diHusion  of  principles,  whether 
good  or  evil.  Isolation  of  mind  and  a  monopoly  of  ideas  are  by 
no  means  prominent  features  in  its  manifestation.  All  things  are 
expansive,  and  aim'  at  universality.  Man  is  brought  nearer  to 
man,  and  there  is  much  more  fellowship  of  intellect  with  intellect, 
than  in  tbe  ages  that  are  past.  The  associations  that  exist  in  our 
day  could  never  have  taken  root  and  grown  up  under  the  old  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  despotisms.  Knowledge  is  not,  as  aforetime,  the 
inberitance  of  any  particidar  class.  It  has  descended  from  the 
privileged  few,  and  become  the  common  projjerty  of  the  many. 
Tbe  repressive  influences  of  the  middle  ages,  that  checked  the  in- 

T 


274  THE    CLUBS. 

terconrse  of  mind  with  mind,  and  made  knowledge  a  monopoly,  can 
no  more  reUnn  than  the  years  that  are  passed  can  be  rolled  back 
upon  the  world.  The  current  not  only  Hows,  in  a  great  measure, 
imimpeded  from  man  to  man,  indi\dduallj,  but  numerous  and 
powerful  combinations  are  formed  for  diverting  and  diffusing 
it  throughout  the  heart  of  humanity.  These  combinations  are 
mighty  for  evil  as  well  as  for  good. 

It  would  be  ungrateful  to  overlook  the  amount  of  this  kind  of 
instrumentality  that  is  employed  on  the  side  of  righteousness  and 
truth.  There  are  our  noble  foreign  missionary  societies,  tlie  glory 
of  our  land,  which,  having  sprung  up  within  the  last  sixty  years 
or  little  more,  have  made  the  desert,  in  many  parts,  blossom  and 
rejoice  as  the  rose  ;  and  have  produced  a  mighty  reflex  influence 
for  good  on  the  moral  and  intellectual  state  of  a  vast  portion  of  our 
home  population.  There  are  our  Christian  instruction  agencies,  our 
city  and  town  missions,  which  carry  the  lamp  of  divine  truth  into 
the  dark  places  of  our  cities  and  towns,  and  point  the  ignorant  and 
lost  to  Him  who  is  the  light  and  life  of  men.  There  are  our  young 
men's  Christian  associations,  which  seek  to  lay  hold  of  the  minds 
of  ingenuous  youth,  and  protect  them  from  an  infidel  literature 
and  science,  by  presenting  them  with  a  i)hilosophy  and  literature 
baptized  in  the  influences  of  the  gospel.  And  there  are  numerous 
other  societies  branched  out  over  the  land,  which  tend  to  counteract 
pernicious  error,  and  directly  or  indirectly  produce  much  moral 
good.  Such  associations  as  these,  which  are  peculiar  to  the  age 
in  which  we  live,  are  valuable  beyond  all  estimate,  as  influences^ 
on  the  side  of  whatsoever  things  are  true  and  pare,  lovely  and  of 
good  re])ort.=- 

*  Mr.  Mayhew.  in  liis  work  on  "  London  Labour  and  the  London  Poor,"  has 
done  good  service  by  fixing  our  attention  on  tbe  pocial  and  religious  condition  of 
the  masses.  There  "is  room  for  administering  a  rebuke  to  our  indifference  to  the 
amount  of  irreligion  and  wretchedness  that,  like  the  troubled  sea,  is  ever  rolling 
around  the  base  of  the  social  edifice.  But,  why  do  it  with  a  frown  directed  towards 
missionary  zenl  in  other  lands  ?  The  heathenism  at  home  has  by  no  means  been 
ovei-looked,  while  attending  to  the  heathenism  abroad.  The  church  of  Cbrist  in 
our  land  has  two  loud  calls  addressed  to  her  at  present.  The  one  is  to  propagate 
the  Gospel  in  foreign  parts,  especially  among  Continental  nations,  where  adooris 
open.  The  other  is  to  look  to  our  own  countrymen  who,  though  surrounded  by 
churrhps  p'ace  themselves  beyond  the  pale  of  their  influence.  We  should  have 
liked  Mr.'Mayhew's  remarks  better  had  lie  said,  "  this  thing  ought  ye  to  have  done, 
and  not  have'left  the  other  undone."  The  passage  to  which  we  refer  is  the  fol- 
lowing •  speaking  of  the  metropolitan  costermongers,  he  says:  "  Indeed  the  moral 
and  rf  li"ious  state  of  these  men  is  a  foul  disgrace  to  us,  laughing  to  scorn  our 
zeal  for  the  '  propagation  of  the  gospel  in  forehpi  pans,'  and  making  our  many  so- 
cieties for  the  civilization  of  savagf-s  on  the  other  side  of  the  globe  appear  like  a 
'  delusion,  a  mockery,  and  a  snare,'  wlien  we  hive  so  many  people  sunk  in  the  low- 
est  depths  of  barbarism  round  about  our  very  homes.  It  is  well  to  have  bishops 
of  New  Zealand  when  we  have  Christianized  all  o?(rou-»  heathen  ;  but  with  30,000 
individuals  in  merely  one  of  our  cities,  utterly  creedless,  mindless,  and  principle- 
less  surelv'it  would  look  more  like  earnestness  on  our  part  if  we  created  bishops 
of  tiie  New-cut  and  sent '  right  reverend  fatheis'  to  watr-h  over  the  '  cure  of  souls' 
in  the  Broadway  and  the  Brill.  If  our  sense  of  duty  will  not  rouse  us  to  do  this, 
at  least  our  regard  for  our  own  interests  should  teach  us,  that  it  is  not  safe  to 


THE  CLUBS.  275 

But  we  are  apt  to  be  affected  with  these  as  with  the  influences 
for  good  exerted  by  the  press.  We  are  dazzled  by  them,  and  become 
blinded,  as  it  were,  to  the  numerous  and  powerful  combinations 
on  the  side  of  evil.  Our  insensibiHty  to  tl)e  latter  may,  indeed, 
partly  be  accounted  for  from  the  fact,  that  many  of  these  evil 
agencies  work  secretly  and  in  darkness,  though  not  the  less 
effectually.  They  hate  the  light,  neither  come  to  the  light  lest 
their  deeds  should  be  reproved.  Whereas  the  other  associations, 
being  tlie  children  of  the  light  and  of  the  day,  come  to  the  light 
that  their  deeds  may  be  made  manifest  that  they  are  wrought  in 
God.  But,  whether  openly  or  concealed,  it  is  unquestionable  that 
societies,  which  tend  either  directly  or  indirectly  to  advance  the 
cause  of  infidelity,  are  spread,  like  a  network,  over  the  frame  of 
human  society.  Their  design  is  not  always  broadly  expressed  in 
their  title,  and  their  irreligious  influences  are  not  unfrequently 
exerted  irx  combination  with  plans  and  objects  that  in  themselves 
are  perfectly  legitimate.  Sometimes  the  demon  of  riugodliuess 
stalks  forth  under  the  patronage  of  an  association,  the  inscription 
on  whose  banner  is  purely  political,  at  other  times  the  badge  is 
literary  or  scientific,  at  other  times  it  is  social  amelioration,  and  at 
other  times  it  is  even  divine  and  theological.  But,  under  all  these 
shields,  advances  and  works  the  selfsame  spirit  whose  mission  is  to 
war  against,  pervert,  and,  if  possible,  destroy  spiiitual  Christianity. 
The  religion  of  Christ  can  bring  a  heavy  charge  against  many 
of  the  literary  and  philosophical  societies  existing  in  oin-  own  and 
other  lands.  Paramount  in  her  claims,  she  might  say  to  some  of 
them,  'ye  have  kept  me  standing  and  knocking  at  the  door  with- 
out, and,  as  if  I  were  a  stranger  and  a  foreigner,  have  refused  to 
admit  me  within.  Ye  have  most  unnaturally  divorced  science  and 
literature  from  theology,  and  what  God  hath  joined  together  ye 
have  put  asiuider.  I  claim  the  homage  of  the  whole  realm  of 
nature.  Mine  is  the  world  of  matter,  mine  also  is  the  world  of 
mind.  But  ye  have  treated  me  as  an  alien,  and  have  thrust  me 
into  a- corner,  and  by  insulating  science  from  its  natural  relations 
to  theology,  have  occupied  inquiring  minds  with  the  former,  at 
the  cost  of  excluding  or  undervaluing  the  latter.  '  He  that  is  not 
with  me  is  against  me.'  Upon  others,  the  gospel  could  fasten  the 
charge  of  positive  hostility,  and  say,  '  ye  have  made  the  stars  in 
their  courses  fight  against  God;  ye  have  ransacked  the  bowels  of 
the  earth  and  made  their  records  speak  against  Him  whose  hand 
inscribed  them  ;  and  ye  have  given  such  views  of  man  and  of  the 
universe  as  directly  conflict  with  the  claims  of  religion  both  natural 
and  revealed.  In  endeavouring  to  advance  the  sciences  ye  have 
waged  war  against  theology,  which  stands  at  the  head  of  them  ; 

allow  this  vast  dung  heap  of  ignorance  and  vice  to  seethe  and  fust,  hreeding  a  so- 
cial pestilence  in  the  very  heart  of  our  land."  —  London  Labour  and  the  London 
Poor,  vol.  i.  p.  lOL 

T  2 


27G  THE    CLL'BS. 

and,  in  prosecuting  tliG  interests  of  literature,  ye  "have  scorned  the 
excelloncy  of  that  knowledge  for  which  one  of  tlie  greatest  of  the 
sons  of  men  couuled  all  things  but  loss.'  Not  a  few  institutions 
of  influence  and  renown  could  thus  be  reckoned  as  abetting,  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  the  cause  of  infidelity. 

But  what  we  have  chiefly  in  view,  in  this  chapter,  are  the  po- 
litical and  socialist  clubs.  Societies  for  the  peaceful  discussion  of 
matters  of  social  polity,  and  the  promotion  of  social  ameliorations, 
are  not  only  legitimate,  but  have  often  done  good  service  to  the 
comnuniity.  We  exclude,  therefore,  all  such  as  sustain  this  cha- 
racter from  our  enumeration  of  evil  agencies;  and  restrict  our 
remarks  to  those  which  aim,  in  connection  with  social  changes,  at 
an  innovation  into  the  substance  of  Ciu-istianity,  or  the  subversion 
of  it  as  tlie  divinely  revealed  system  of  truth.  Their  name  is 
legion.  The  socialist  clubs  of  the  Continent,  for  the  most  part, 
partake  of  this  character. 

France  is  the  hot-bed  of  socialism,  whence  it  is  propagated 
throughout  Switzerland  and  Germany.  And  it  is  in  France  that 
the  cluh.s  to  which  we  are  adverting  exist,  or  have  existed  until 
very  recently,  in  great  numbers  and  efficiency.  Socialism,  as  we 
have  seen,  does  not  stand  neutral  in  regard  to  religion.  As 
hitherto  organized,  it  has  been  steeped  in  irreligion.  Christianity 
comes  within  the  sweep  of  its  levelling  agency,  and  it  aims  at  sup- 
planting the  established  forms  of  worship.  Its  religion,  at  the 
very  best,  is  one  of  social  equality  or  man-worship.  Depravity, 
in  its  creed,  lies  in  the  inequalities  and  oppressiveness  of  the 
social  frame-work;  pi'ivate  property  is  the  demon  to  be  repressed 
or  cast  out;  and  equality,  liberty,  and  fraternity,  in  a  mere  poli- 
tical sense,  constitute  the  everlasting  Gospel  of  humanity.  The 
system  puts  on  a  political  face,  but  it  is  decidedly  infidel  at  heart. 

Associations  for  the  propagation  of  these  opinions  rose  up  in 
immense  numbers  and  great  vigour,  in  France,  after  the  outbreak 
of  the  late  revolution.  These  ojiinions  had  long  been  floating 
throughout  the  mass  of  society,  had  formed  the  subjects  of  dis- 
cussion in  workshops  and  social  meetings,  and  had  been  wafted 
abroad  by  tracts  and  Journals.  But  the  regularly  organized  clubs 
combined  and  strengthened  their  scattered  adherents,  and,  along 
with  the  press,  for  ii  d  the  most  efTective  socialist  propaganda. 
Nothing  gives  a  more  powerful  impulse  to  any  system  than  the 
a])proximation  of  its  abettors,  one  toward  another,  through  such 
agencies  as  associations.  Discussions  in  clubs,  in  proportion  to 
the  extent  of  surface  on  which  they  are  brought  to  bear,  are  in 
general  more  influential  than  discussions  in  public  joui'nals,  es- 
peitially  in  matters  that  tend  to  excite  and  interest  the  ])assions  of 
men.  Sucli  associations  not  unfrequently  conunand  some  of  the 
most  eloquent  and  clever  men  that  are  to  be  found  within  and 
witliout  the  public  assemblies  of  the  nation.     In  the  great  French 


THE    CLUBS.  '277 

Revolnticn  of  1789,  the  clubs  were  resorted  to  by  some  of  tlie 
ablest  and  most  popidar  of  tlie  public  men  of  E'ranee.  Robespierre 
and  tlie  other  revolutionary  chiefs  swayed  tliera  by  their  infltienfe, 
and  through  tliem  swayed  the  National  Assembly.  The  doors  of 
these  clubs  were  flung  open  to  tke  people,  and  there,  ai5  well  as  in 
other  ways,  the  masses  heard  those  ojunions  enforced,  and  i-eceived 
that  impulse,  which  urged  tliern  to  sweep  away  the  throne  and  the 
altar,  and  deluge  the  land  with  infidelity  and  blood. 

The  socialist  leaders,  at  the  revolution  of  Februnry.  1848,  exerted 
their  influence  on  the  Frencli  community  chiefly  tln'ougli  the  nje- 
dium  of  such  associations.  That  )-evolution  was  vahmble  in  their 
eyes,  only  as  it  afforded  them  an  opportunity  of  bringing  about 
certain  great  social  cljanges.  The  many  unjust  and  oppressive 
arrangements  of  society  yielded  tliem  a  ground  on  which  to  stand 
and  ply  their  logic.  But  not  satisfied  witli  con-ecting  abuses,  they 
aimed  at  remodelling  the  whole  f)-ame-work,  and  would  virtually 
have  snl)stituted  socialism  as  a  system  for  the  Gospel,  or  have 
baptized  it  with  the  name  of  Christ:ianity.  The  discussions  of  the 
socialist  clubs  have  often  assumed  a  complexiow  of  this  kind. 
There  it  has  been  maintained  that  socialism  i?  the  true  religion  of 
Christ;  that  He  was  the  Prince  of  the  Communists;  that  a  social 
amelioration  was  the  design  of  setting  up  the  kingdom  of  God 
among  men  ;  and  that  it  therefore  should  supplant  all  other  forms 
of  civil  and  religious  polity.  These  clubs  were  the  chief  places  of 
resort  during  the  time  in  which  France,  like  a  troubled  sea,  could 
not  rest.  The  din  of  intestine  strife  was  heard  in  the  midst  of 
them.  But,  notwithstanrling  their  internal  differences,  they  all 
agreed  in  proclaiming  a  social  revolution  to  be  the  hope  of  the 
world,  and  tlie  grand  means  of  indefinitely  a  ^meliorating  tlie  con- 
dition of  man.  In  the  clubs,  indeed,  not  to  speak  of  the  broad 
atheism  often  manifested,  there  was  preached,  in  connection  with 
social  reform,  another  gospel,  as  different  Irora  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  as  darkness  is  from  light.  And  countless  multitudes  received 
the  proclamation  with  an  eagerness  seldom  manifested,  at  least 
on  so  large  a  scale,  by  those  who  listen  to  the  real  glad  tidings  of 
great  joy. 

Socialism,  happily,  has  failed  of  seizing  the  reins  of  government, 
and  the  woi-ld  has  been  spared  again  witnessing  the  leign  of  pro- 
scription and  infidelity.  But,  though  banished  from  the  Luxem- 
bourg, an:l  beaten  down  at  the'  tribune,  and  having  its  clubs 
placed  under  the  ban,  it  has  by  no  means  halted  or  lost  its  vigour. 
The  clubs,  in  spite  of  all  opposition,  are  said  to  exist  secretly  in. 
great  numbers.  Discussions,  destructive  of  all  social  order  and 
sound  religion,  are  carried  on.  Less  cons])icuous  than  it  once 
was  in  the  eye  of  the  public,  socialism,  with  indomitable  peise- 
verance.  is  prosecuting  its  work  of  proselytizing  beneath  tlic  sur- 
face.   It  aims  at  leavening  the  entire  mass  of  society  with  its 


278  THE    CLUBS. 

principles.  And,  though  politically  disunited  and  weak,  it  is  still 
strong  in  its  irreligious  influences,  because  the  tendency  of  its 
different  contending  sects  is  hostile  to  that  truth  which  requires 
repentance  toward  God  and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Vast  multitudes  of  the  working  classes  on  the  Continent,  who 
have  a  growing  faith  in  their  social  elevation,  are  prepared,  by  the 
deep  grudge  which  they  bear  to  the  existing  social  arrangements, 
to  apphiud  the  comnninist  doctrines  however  irreligious,  as  they 
fall  from  the  lips  of  the  club  orator.  And  it  is  not  difficult  to  con- 
ceive how  masses  of  men,  politically  and  socially  disaffected,  may, 
by  haraTjgues,  have  their  passions  roused  against  the  existing 
religious,  as  well  as  civil  institutions  of  the  country,  and  thereby 
against  religion  itself  Each  of  these  clubs  is  a  vortex  of  irre- 
ligion  into  which  artisan  after  artisan  is  drawn  by  the  hope  which 
is  held  out  of  an  indefinite  amelioration  in  their  condition.  Let 
such  associations  as  these  be  suppressed  by  the  law,  it  is  just  the 
scattering  of  the  seeds  of  anarchy  and  ungodliness  abroad  to  form 
centres  of  influence  elsewhere.  These  clubs,  in  their  scattered 
members,  or  in  their  secret  meetings,  are,  we  are  persuaded,  no 
less  influential  on  tlie  side  of  irreligion  than  wlien  they  flourished 
openly  without  opposition.  The  spirits  of  evil,  when  not  sutTered 
to  remain  in  open  council,  meet  in  conclave  and  act  the  more 
resolutely,  under  the  impulse  already  given,  in  propagating  abroad 
their  infidel  opinions. 

It  is  not  to  France,  however,  that  such  associations  have  been 
confined.  They  overspread,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  the  most 
of  Europe.  Tlie  cities  of  Germany  and  Switzerland  were  rife 
with  them,  and  nowhere  was  their  atheistical  character  more 
broad  and  decided.  The  communism  of  these  countries  is  to  be 
traced  to  France.  Myriads  of  German  workmen  are  ever  passing 
to  and  from  Paris,  where  they  become  acquainted,  and  fall  in, 
with  all  the  social  movements  of  the  French  working  classes.  It 
was  calculated,  a  few  years  ago,  that  there  were  from  forty  thou- 
sand to  sixty  thousand  Germans  in  Paris,  employed,  or  seeking 
employment,  as  mechanics.  These,  generally,  become  members 
of  clubs,  where  a  gross  infidelity  and  a  lawless  democracy  go 
hand  in  hand ;  and  then,  returning  in  process  of  time  to  their 
own  country,  they  organize  associations  of  a  similar  character,  or 
swell  those  that  are  already  existing.  But  if  the  German  moving 
population  imbibe  and  carry  home  the  infidel  French  socialism,  it 
is  not  to  be  forgotten  that  they  have  an  infidelity  of  their  own 
which  they  impart  to  others.  The  infidel  principles  of  the  Hege- 
lian school  are  not  restricted  to  university  students.  They  are 
familiar  to  the  German  workmen,  and  they  reduce  them  to  prac- 
tice. Pantheism,  or  the  boldest  atheism,  has  been  avowed  and 
advocated  in  their  clubs.  The  belief  in  a  living  personal  God  has 
been  repudiated  as  a  worn-out  fiction,  and  the  notion  of  a  heaven 


THE   CLUBS.  279 

beyond  tlie  grave  has  been  denounced  as  the  greatest  hinderance 
in  realizing  a  paradise  on  earth.  "  Man  by  liimself,"  said  one  of 
the  boldest  and  most  strenuous  apostles  of  these  infidel  clubs, 
"Man  is  the  religion  of  the  coming  age." 

It  has  been  affirmed  that  the  test  of  admission  to  the  higher 
Jionours  of  these  associations,  was  an  unscrupulous  denial  of  the 
existence  of  God.  He,  whose  conscience  prevented  him  going 
thus  far,  was  not,  however,  wholly  excluded,  but  placed  under  the 
most  effective  teaching  in  order  to  induce  him  to  renounce  the  old 
dogma,  and  make  him  a  proselyte  of  the  true  stamp.  These  chibs 
had  their  divisions  and  sub-divisions  for  carrying  on  more  effec- 
tually the  work  of  proselytism,  and,  with  an  energy  and  zeal 
worthy  of  a  better  cause,  became  all  things  to  all  men  in  order 
that  they  might  gain  multitudes.  There  are  two  social  arrange- 
ments which,  though  crigiuaUy  designed  for  good,  greatly 
strengthen  the  infidelity  of  the  German  workmen  who  compose 
these  clubs.  The  one  is  the  corporation  law  which  renders  it 
necessary  for  the  German  artisan  to  travel  before  he  can  obtain  a 
master's  diploma.  The  design  of  this  is  that  every  young  man, 
on  finishing  his  apprenticeship),  might,  by  two  or  more  years 
travelling,  get  thoroughly  acquainted  with  his  business.  The 
otlier  is  the  existence  of  the  Hcrherge,  or  tradesman's  house  of 
call,  of  which  one  exists  for  every  trade  in  those  cities  where  the 
corporation  law  is  in  foi'ce.  The  former  arrangement  brings  the 
moving  artisans  in  contact  with  the  infidelity  that  is  afloat.  The 
latter  gives  the  power  of  association  to  all  the  irreligious  opinions 
that  they  have  gathered  in  their  wanderings.  In  these  resorts  of 
the  travelling  journeyman,  says  the  noble-minded  Wichern,  "  the 
A.  B.  C.  of  democracy  is  taught,  and  many  advance  in  the  political 
catechism,  systematically  gone  through,  until  the  top-stone  is  laid 
in  red  repulilicanism  and  avowed  atheism."-- 

Switzerland,  also,  recently  abounded  in  infidel  communist  clubs. 
It  has  been  asserted  that  not  fewer  than  twenty  thousand  German 
mechanics  in  that  land,  were  exposed  to  iheir  seductions,  the 
greater  portion  of  whom  have  come  under  their  demoralizing  in- 
fluence. Here  ultra-radicalism  and  ultra-atheism  are  closely  con- 
nected. The  notorious  Marr,  who  learned  his  atheism  in'' these 
synagogues  of  Satan,   boasted   of  having  been  instrumental  in 

*  A  correspondent  in  "  Evangelical  Christenclom"  for  Feb.  1850,  states,  "there 
are  secret  clubs  of  commuuists  everywhere;  for  instance,  eight  in  Berlin,  four 
in  Cologne,  two  in  Dusseldorf,  three  in  ■Mainz,  &c.  &c.  These  clubs  haveso-callad 
'apostles,'  of  whom  there  are  many  hundreds,  who  declare  (I  extract  it  from  one 
of  their  paraplilets),  '  We  stand  on  the  i'oundation  of  the  Apostles,  but  we  are  free 
from  the  blindness  of  the  first  scholars  of  the  great  mastery  We  trouble  not 
ourselves  about  the  miracles  of  tlie  Jewish  philosopher,  and  inquire  not  after  his 
passport  to  heaven.  The  Son  of  God  could  not  save  the  world  ;  his  doctrine  be- 
came a  ciir«e  for  eighteen  centtiries,'  &c."  Men  blaspheme  against  "Jesus  Christ 
himself,  the  chief  corner-stone,"  and  yet  maintain  that  they  stand  on  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Apostles." 


'>80  THE    CLUBS 

inducing  many  hunclreds  of  liis  countiymen  to  renonnce  their 
faitli  in  God,  and  of  sending  them  back  to  their  native  land 
avowed  enemies  to  all  religion  but  man-worship.- 

When  such  numerous  and  powerful  associations  for  evil  as 
these,  are  known  to  have  existed  over  continental  Europe— asso- 
ciations wliere  the  most  revolutionary  politics,  tlie  most  unblusli- 
ing  atlieism,  and  the  most  blaspliemous  songs,  have  been  heard 
and  enthusiastically  greeted— it  is  not  wonderful  that,  amid  the 
social  heavings  of  foreign  lands,  there  should  have  been  throvvn  up 
such  an  amount  of  irreligion  which,  like  the  smoke  out  of  the 
bottomless  pit,  darkened  the  sun  and  air,  and  defeated  those 
attempts  at  a  salutary  change  in  civil  and  ecclesiastical  institutions, 
the  success  of  which  was  so  desirable 

England  too,  though  by  no  means  to  the  same  fearful  extent, 
and  in  the  presence  of  a  higher  amount  of  good  counteractive 
influences,  has  her  infidel  clubs  and  associ-ations.  It  is  but  the 
truth,  when  we  say  that  our  woi'king  classes,  as  a  whole,  are  much 
souiiiJer  at  heart,  and  that  there  exists  among  them  a  greater  por- 
tion of  vital  godliness,  than  is  to  be  foimd  among  the  workmen  of 
France  and  Germany.  But  let  not  any  recent  manifestations  of 
social  stability  and  sound  piety  on  the  part  of  our  working  classes, 
blind  us  to  tlie  fact  that  infidel  principles  and  agencies  are  at  work 
among  our  artisans,  endeavouring  to  enlist  their  political  and 
social'  disaffection  on  the  gide  of  evil.  There  is  an  infidelity  allied 
Avith  intelligence,  or  half-intelligence,  as  well  as  an  infidelity  allied 
with  ignoi-ance.  The  former  prevails  to  a  large  extent  among  the 
artisans  in  our  cities  and  towns,  and  strengthens  and  propagates 
itself  by  associations.  There  is.  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  a  deep 
disaffection  and  grudge  at  the  heart  of  the  working  classes,  on 
account  of  their  political  disabilities  and  social  wrongs,  wdiether 
these  be  counted  real  or  imaginary,  that  gives  the  apostles  of  au 
infidel  socialism  a  ground  on  which  to  ply  their  arts  of  seduction. 
In  many  of  the  workmen's  clubs  which  are  to  be  found  throughout 
the  empire,  the  political  and  moral  amelioration  of  man  is  held  out 
as  the  result  of  certain  socialist  theories.  Christianity  is  cither 
supplanted  in  their  declamations,  or  both  it  and  its  institutions 
are  represented,  openly  or  by  insinuation,  as  among  the  instru- 
ments of  oppression,  and  the  iiinderances  to  the  realization  of  their 
golden  age.  These  are  the  sermons  to  which  multitudes  eagerly 
fisten  on^vork-day  evenings  and  on  the  day  of  rest.  It  is  either 
the  doctrine  of  material  circumstances,  or  a  system  of  man-worship, 
that  is  ]ireaclied.  'J'he  club  orators  point  to  the  existing  arrange- 
ments of  society  as  the  chief  evils,  and  they  ignore  all  motive 
power  but  the  human  will  in  the  work  of  regeneiation.  T^Iultitiides 
of  our  young  and  lialf-intelligent  artisans,  in  resorting  to  such 

*  Evan^-tilical  Christendom,  vol.  iii.  p.  13. 


THE    CLUES.  281 

teaching,  are  promised  liberty  by  those  \Yho  themselves  are  tho 
servants  of  corniiHion. 

That  there  exists  at  the  ]n-espnt  moment,  a  system  of  agTr.cy, 
somewhat  loosely  and  irrepfularly  organixed,  i'or  disseminating 
infidel  principles,  not  only  in  the  metropolis  but  thronohout  the 
empire,  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Societies  of  this  kind,  differing  in 
the  number  of  their  adhei-ents  and  in  the  vigour  oi'  tlieir  operations, 
are  to  be  found  scatteied  here  and  there  fiom  the  Thames  to  the 
Clyde.  London  is  the  heart  of  the  movement;  and  that  heait  is 
now  full  of  energy.  The  numbers  of  well-attended  weekly  lectures 
and  discussions  tiiat  are  held  in  the  city  and  suburbs,  the  exertions 
made  to  widen  the  influence  of  one  or  more  atheisticul  organs,  not 
to  mention  some  efforts  of  a  more  fitful  and  irregular  character, 
betoken  a  resolute  attempt  to  pervert  the  people.  The  blood  is 
conveyed  from  the  heart  thiough  the  body  by  tlie  arteries,  and  these 
we  find  in  such  populous  places  as  Bradlbixl,  Manchester,  Leeds, 
Dudley,  Nottingham,  Bolton,  Blackbuin.  New(  astle,  Glasgow,  &.c. 
These  societies,  like  others  of  an  opposite  description  at  which 
they  are  continually  railing,  have  their  differences — their  essential 
and  non-essential  i)oints.  But  one  word  has  recently  been  adopted 
so  as  to  cover  all  their  principles — and  none  could  he  more  ai)pro- 
priate  if  it  be  rightly  understood,  only  there  is  a  convenient 
ambiguity  about  it — the  word  secvlari.sni.  Two  of  the  non-essential 
points  are  the  existence  of  a  Supreme  Being  distinct  from  nature, 
and  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  Tliese,  it  seems,  are  to  be  left 
open  questions:  some  secularists  boldly  avowing  their  disbelief  in 
them,  and  others  not  having  attained  to  such,  a  pitch  of  hero^'sra. 
The  one  essential  article  of  the  creed — the  shibboletli  of  the  party, 
the  common  linking  })rinciple — is  that  morality  is  independent  of 
religion.  The  ])resent  scene  is  to  be  regarded  as  if  it  weie  the 
whole  of  man.  This  life,  as  it  is  alleged,  being  tlie  first  in  ceitainty, 
must  be  placed  first  in  importance.  'J'hough  the  ]))inciples  are 
out  and  out  atheistical,  the  term  atheist  is  now  abandoned  for  its 
bad  sound.  Though  all  that  is  worthy  of  the  name  of  tiutb  be 
re-jectcd,  the  designation  of  infidel  is  to  be  disused,  because  of  its 
ill  fame.  And  under  this  c*  nvenient  title  of  secularism,  natme  is 
to  be  preached  as  the  only  subject  of  knowledge,  and  man  is 
to  be  taught  to  limit  his  thoughts  and  anxieties  to  the  ])resent 
world.  Our  seculai-ists  must  tear  out  men's  consciences  first,  turn, 
the  human  breast  into  a  sepulchre  of  dead  hopes,  seal  it  up,  and 
set  a  \vatch,  before  they  can  ex]>ect  any  great  portion  of  the  woild 
to  be  converted  to  their  princij)les;  for  if  there  is  one  thing  more 
clearly  established  than  another  by  the  voice  of  miiversal  history, 
it  is  that  man  will  liave  a  religion,  and  that,  in  the  sense  of  com- 
pletely ignoring  a  Supreme  Being  distinct  ironi  nature  and  shut- 
ting out  futurity  from  his  view,  man  is  not  a  s?,crlarist.  Let  it' 
be  understood  then  that  no-religion  is  the  fundamental  dogma,  of' 


2S2  THE    CLDBS. 

these  societies;  that  moralit}^  without  religion,  or  the  never-failiDg 
streams  after  the  fountain  has  been  sealed,  is  the  only  prospect 
that  they  seek  to  realize;  and  we  care  not  whethei'  they  he  called 
agencies  of  secularism  or  sensualism,  though  v/e  thiuk  the  latter 
designation  the  more  appi'opriate  of  the  two.  * 

The  German,  and  other  foreign  workmen,  have  their  clubs  in 
om-  own  land,  which  are  for  the  most  part  of  an  irreligious  character. 
This  is  especially  the  case  in  London.  Chevalier  Bunsen  stated, 
a  few  years  ago,  at  the  formation  of  the  Foreigners'  Evangelical 
Society,  that  there  were  from  thirty-five  thousand  to  forty-five 
thousand  Germans,  or  about  half  the  whole  number  of  foreigners, 
in  this  country.  Most  of  these  are  workmen.  The  clever  design- 
ing men,  connected  with  the  clubs,  eagerly  lay  hold  of  them,  and 
persuade  them  to  attend  their  meetings,  where  they  imbibe  the 
most  infidel  principles. 

Thus  the  power  of  association  by  which  great  things  among  us 
are  done  on  the  side  of  goodness  and  truth,  is  mightily  employed 
on  behalf  of  the  worst  forms  of  evil.  It  has  been  ascertained  that 
infidelity  is  generally  most  prevalent  in  those  trades  which  admit 
of  most  intercourse  among  the  workmen.  One  clever  infidel,  in  a 
Avorkshop,  will  sometimes  exert  all  the  influence  of  the  club  orator, 
especially  if  he  comes  in  contact  with  men  who  are  somewhat  pre- 
judiced against,  or  but  nominally  attached  to  Christianity.  We 
have  heard  of  a  German  engineer — a  man  of  remarkable  mental 
power  and  ener^n-  —  who,  some  years  ago,  got  into  a  large  factory 
in  the  south  of  London,  and  gi'adually  diffused  infidel  principles 
among  the  workmen.  It  was  generally  understood  that  in  this 
propagandism,  he  acted  as  the  deputy  of  an  infidel  association. 
The  Camlachie  weaver,  whom  Dr.  Chalmers  had  been  instrumental 
in  converting,  was  apprenticed,  when  a  boy,  to  an  infidel,  of  whom 
it  is  told  that  he  succeeded  in  seducing  the  twenty  men  under  him 
into  unbelief.-  How^  melancholy  to  think  that  men  so  sedulously 
do  the  work  of  him  who  is  the  great  adversary  of  God  and  man ! 
And  how  often  may  the  children  of  light  learn  a  lesson  of  united 
effort  and  persevering  zeal,  in  pi'osecuting  their  noble  object,  from 
the  way  in  which  the  children  of  this  world  seek  their  destructive 
ends.  "  When  bad  men  combine,"  said  a  great  English  statesman, 
"good  men  must  associate." 

Combinations  for  evil  have  not,  however,  as  already  noticed, 
the  field  to  themselves.  There  exists,  and  happily  is  multi])lying 
a  strong  counteractive  and  aggressive  Christian  agency  which,  if 
rightly  adapted  so  as  to  meet  the  ever  shifting  foims  of  error,  is 
calculated  to  do  good  service  in  the  cause  of  truth.  We  do  not 
refer  so  nnich  to  the  Christian  churches  that  stud  the  land,  as  to 
tlie  beneficent  instrumentalities  that  owe  their  existence  and  sup- 

*  Dr.  Hauua's  Life  of  Chalmers,  voT.  ii.  p.  481. 


THE    CLUBS.  283 

port  to  these  churches.  There  is,  we  cannot  help  thinking,  a 
louder  complaint  of  inefficiency  and  want  of  adaptation  uttered 
by  some  men  against  our  regularly  constituted  associations  for 
Christian  worship,  than  the  nature  of  the  case  really  warrants. 
Because  our  creeds  have  no  attractions  for  vast  masses  of  men 
who  are  seeking  a  religion  of  political  liberty  or  social  elevation, 
they  are  spoken  of  as  a  dead  letter,  as  worn  out  and  eti'ete.  Be- 
cause our  pulpit  ministrations  fail  to  win  the  men  who  hang  un- 
weariedly  on  tiie  lips  of  club  orators,  therefore,  it  is  alleged,  they 
are  not  adapted  to  the  wants  of  the  age  in  which  we  live.  We  have 
admitted,  in  another  part  of  this  essay,  that  the  j^nlpit,  in  some 
quarters,  might  relax  a  little  of  its  rigidity  without  surrendering 
any  of  its  orthodoxy,  that  its  teaching  might  take  a  wider  range 
while  all  its  instructions  nevertheless  are  given  from  under  the 
shadow  of  the  cross,  and  that  a  nearer  approach  to  the  colloquial 
in  style  might  be  made  without  losing  anything  of  its  grave 
dignity.  But  far  distant  be  the  day,  when  it  shall  descend  to  the 
political  arena,  and  take  up  socialist  questions,  the  discussions  of 
which  have  greater  attractions  for  multitudes  than  the  publishing 
of  the  simple  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.  The  fact  is,  that  a  great 
portion  of  the  blame  which  is  laid  at  the  door  of  churches,  must 
be  thrown  over  upon  the  stubborn  fact  of  human  depravity. 
There  are  vast  numbers  of  the  jpulpits  of  our  evangelical  churches 
occupied  hymen  of  superior  abilities,  of  great  unction  and  of  living 
power,  and  many  of  these  churches,  it  is  not  to  be  forgotten,  are 
composed,  in  a  considerable  extent,  of  working  men. 

But  the  multitudes  who  throng  the  socialist  clubs,  or  frequent 
the  secularist  lecture  room,  whether  in  our  own'  or  in  foreign  lands, 
are  beyond  the  pale  of  the  pulpit's  influence,  because  deeply  pre- 
judiced against  its  teaching,  and,  if  reached  at  all,  must  be  reached 
by  other  agencies.  Such  agencies  exist,  and  what  is  wanting  is 
that  they  may  be  multiplied  or  supplemented,  more  vigorously 
used,  have  men  of  mental  j^ower  as  well  as  burning  zeal  in  their 
employ,  and  work  a  little  moi-e  on  the  principle  of  becoming  all 
things  to  all  men.  Our  home  missionary  associations,  with  the 
exception  perhaps  of  the  London  City  Mission,  restrict  their  opera- 
tions too  exclusively  to  the  ignorant  masses  who  are  a  degree  be- 
low the  working  classes  to  whom  we  refer,  but  from  whom  their  in- 
fidelity descends  and  is  received  by  the  lower  grade.  While  the 
many  excellent  young  men's  Christian  associations  which  are 
rising  up  with  great  vigour,  are  fitted  rather  to  shield  from  danger 
those  who  have  a  nominal  connection  with  the  church,  but  who 
are  exposed  to  strong  infidel  allurements,  than  to  reach  the  thou- 
sands who  have  fallen  into  the  net  of  the  spoiler.  Something  is 
wanting  to  carry  the  siege  into  the  enemy's  strongholds,  to  attack 
the  various  forms  of  infidelity  that  have  obtained  a  hold  of  the 
minds  of  our  artisans,  to  expose  the  sophistries  and  delusions  under 


284  TUB  CLUBS. 

which  they  are  held,  and  thus  prepare  them  for  the  admission  of 
thjit  truth  hy  which  alone  men  are  made  f-ee.  Piety  however  deep, 
and  zeal  however  indomitahle.  will  not  suiBce  for  this  ohject; 
tiiey  must  he  coinhined  with  intellectual  acuteness  and  grasp;  and 
a  host  of  persons,  in  whom  all  these  qualifications  meet,  can  be 
supplied  hy  the  Christian  church.  In  our  city  missions,  and 
Christian  instrucdon  associations,  we  have  an  admirahle  instru- 
mentality for  carrying-  the  Gospel  to  the  poor  who  will  not  come 
to  the  Gospel.  But  we  want  a  more  efficient  agency,  either  under 
the  direction  of  such  associations,  or  wielded  hy  a  new  comhina- 
tion,  for  the  ]>latforin  occupied  l\y  our  intelligent  or  half-intelligent 
artisans  wlio  are  indifferent  or  hostile  to  evangelical  truth. 

The  Christian  community  in  Germany,  who  are  lar  behind 
England  in  their  home-mission  agencies,  and  who  are  beginning 
to  attribnte  our  stability,  amid  the  late  revolutions,  to  the  salt 
that  is  among  us,  are  putting  forth  their  strength  not  only  to  carry 
the  Gospel  into  the  homes  of  the  poor,  but  to  meet  the  spiritual 
needs  of  their  shifting  artisan  population.  The  conference  lately 
held  at  Wittenberg,  the  city  of  Luther,  has  pledged  itself  to  the 
promotion  of  these  objects.  Wicliern  of  Hamburgh,  a  man  of  a 
noble  spirit,  has  the  merit  of  heading  this  movement  for  tlie  wants 
of  the  German  Fatherland.  He  says,  "  The  blight  of  infidelity 
has  fallen  on  our  laud,  chiefly  tin-ough  the  instrumentality  of  an 
artisan  propaganda;  and  it  must  be  met  by  the  counteracting  in- 
fluence of  a  Christian  artisan  propaganda. — And  thus  the  freedom 
of  speech,  and  press,  and  association,  which  is  now  the  most 
powerful  ally  of  Satan,  will  become  the  best  and  most  effective  aid 
of  Christian  benevolence." 

The  conferences  on  true  Christianity,  opened  at  Paris,  a  few 
years  ago,  in  which  the  working  classes  were  chiefly  addressed, 
arose  out  of  the  felt-want  of  some  specific  agency  to  counteract 
the  infidel  teaching  of  the  socialist  clubs.  These  conferences 
were  attended  with  success,  so  long  as  the  government,  jealous  of 
every  thing  that  could  be  construed  into  a  club,  permitted  them. 
The  artisans  of  the  faubourgs  are  said  to  have  heard  with  interest 
tlie  true  Gospel  of  Chiist.  And  even  educated  auditories  of  so- 
cialists listened  to  the  bearings  of  Christianity  on  those  social 
questions  which  have  been  mixed  up  with  a  medley  of  the  worst 
forms  of  infidelity.'-!^ 

The  desirableness  of  some  such  agency  among  ourselves  has 
been  hinted  at.  It  is  requiied  by  the  niunber  of  reading  artisans 
in  our  cities  and  towns  who  have  been  suffered  to  grow  uj)  strongly 
prejudiced  against  the  gospel,  persons  on  whom  our  churches  have 
no  hold,  but  to  whom  an  infidel  socialist  club  or  association  pre- 
sents an  allurement.     And,  not  to  mention  other  inducements,  it 

*  Evangelical  Christeudom.     Vol.  iii.  pp.  41,  139,  329. 


TeE  CLUBS.  285 

is  required  by  the  Christian  principle  of  accoinmodation.  hecoming 
all  things  to  all  men  in  order  that  we  may  win  some.  It  is  only, 
•we  are  persuaded,  by  some  such  specific  agfjucy  that  the  efforts 
now  making,  in  many  of  our  large  towns,  by  tlie  infidel  secularist 
propaganda,  can  be  met  and  successfully  (jounteracted.  'i'hese 
efforts  are  chietly  directed  to  the  working  classes,  and  it  is  among 
th3  artisans  who  have  either  no  connection  with  the  Chiistian 
churches,  or  but  a  very  slight  one,  that  they  greatly  succeed.  A 
mission  to  such  classes  has  been  talked  of.  By  all  means  let  us 
have  it.  But  let  us  see  that  it  is  adapted  to  the  exigencies  of  the 
case.  AVe  would  deprecate,  in  our  usiud  church  ministrations, 
any  great  departure  fi-om  exi  ting  forms  of  worship.  But,  in 
order  to  the  working  ot  the  agency  for  which  we  plead,  there 
should  be  meetings  for  the  classes  referred  to  held  without  the 
performance  of  any  act  of  worship  pro})erly  so  called.  It  was  so 
in  the  Paris  conlerences.  These  meetings  must  he  addressed  by 
Christian  men  of  good  temper,  and  clear  argumentative  power, 
who  will  speak  to  their  dee])ly  prejudiced  hearers,  and  argue  with 
them,  as  Paul  did  on  Mars  Hill,  in  the  school  of  'J'yrannus,  and 
in  other  places.  This  would  prove  a  meet  and  valuable  practical 
measure  consequent  oa  the  inquiry  which  has  been  instituted  into 
the  prevalent  forms  and  workings  of  modern  infidelity. 

Let  our  evangelical  churches  abide  firmly  by  their  ancient 
creeds,  in  so  far  as  they  harmoni/e  with  "  the  law  and  the  testi- 
mony," and  determine  to  know  nothing  among  men  saying  Jesus 
Christ  and  Him  crucified  ;  but  let  theni,  without  compromise,  adapt 
themselves  more  to  the  growing  intelh'gence  and  thinking  hal)its 
of  the  age.  Let  our  Home  Mission  and  Christian  Instruction 
Agency  Societies  prosecute  vrith  increased  vigour  the  work  wliich 
they  have  begun,  of  carrying  the  light  of  life  into  the  dark  dwell- 
ings of  the  poor  and  ignorant.  Let  our  Young  Men's  Christian 
Associations  multiply  in  every  city  and  town,  in  order  to  preserve, 
or  snatch,  our  generoiis  youth  from  the  apostles  of  systems  of  de- 
lusion. But  let  US  have  another  association,  or,  at  least,  another 
kind  of  instrumentality  for  battling  with  the  infidelities  of  our 
knowing  artisans,  the  evils  which  are  chiefly  to  be  dreaded  in  the 
present  social  state  of  civilized  lands.  Men  of  power  and  tact,  as 
well  as  zeal  and  piety,  are  required  here.  Such  men,  we  doubt  not, 
are  to  be  found.  The  Church  of  Christ,  in  these  lands,  is  strong 
in  her  resources.  Only  let  them  be  drawn  out  and  rightly  applied. 
We  have  no  fear  so  long  as,  to  use  the  words  of  Milton,  triUh  is 
in  the  field;  only  let  her  have  all  the  advantages  of  free  speech, 
press,  and  association.* 

*  We  are  glad  to  see  that  a  mission  to  the  working  classes  in  relation  to  In- 
fidelity, has,  since  writing  the  above,  been  begun. 


283 


CHAPTER  ril. 

THE    SCHOOLS. 

Powerful  influeiice  of  Educational  Institutions  —  Defect  in  our  common  Schools 

—  Want  of  a  Christian  atmosphere  in  higher  Seminaries  — Dr.  Maherly's  testi- 
mony—  Dr.  Arnold's  exertions  —  Oxford  and  Camhiidge  —  Conuteuance  given 
to  Eatioualism  and  Semi-Popery — Secessions  to  Rome  and  to  the  Infidel  ranks 

—  Scottish  Schools — St.  Andrew's  at  the  end  of  last  century— Continental  ■ 
Europe  —  Philosophy  in  France  —  Subserviency  of  Education  to  Romanism  — 
Influence  of  German  Schools  in  propagating  Infidelity  — PedapoEfy  — Panthe- 
istic Philosophy  at  Berlin  —  Neology  at  Halle  — Dr.  Paulus  of  Heidelberg  — 
Countei-active  influence  of  Neander,  Tholuck,  &c.  —  Infidel  teaching  in  the 
Universities  of  Holland  —  Unitarian  Rationalism  of  the  College  of  Geneva  — 
Noble  influence  of  the  New  Academy  — A  Christianized  University. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  educational  institutions  of  a  country  must 
€xert  a  powerful  influence,  for  good  or  evil,  on  the  faith  and  morals 
of  its  inhabitants.  They  mould,  in  a  great  measure,  the  public 
mind.  From  the  venerable  university  down  to  the  humble  village 
school,  they  are  sources  of  moral  power  which  tell  continuously  on 
the  national  sentiments  and  character.  Dr.  Arnold,  on  hearing 
of  new  comers  to  Rugby,  said,  "  It  is  a  most  touching  thing  to 
me,  to  receive  a  new  fellow  from  his  father,  when  I  think  what  an 
influence  there  is  in  this  place  for  evil,  as  well  as  for  good."  The 
amount  of  power  wielded  by  such  agencies  differs,  no  doubt,  at 
different  periods,  and  in  different  lands.  Some  universities,  whose 
renown  extended  far  and  wide  a  century  or  two  ago,  are  now  like 
the  shadow  of  a  great  name ;  while  others,  which  have  sprung  up 
more  recently,  have  all  the  vigour  and  power  of  manhood.  We 
■walk  amid  the  shades  of  some,  just  as  we  tread  half-deserted 
palaces,  whose  life  and  gaiety  are  gone,  and  for  their  influence  we 
must  look  to  the  records  of  the  past.  We  stand  by  others  as  at  a 
fountain  head,  whence  are  ever  issuing  streams  that  enrich  or 
desolate  the  land,  and  can  say  —  here  is  an  instrumentality  of 
good,  or  an  instrumentality  of  evil.  In  some  countries,  the  lesser 
schools,  which  are  branched  out  over  the  land,  are  exerting  the 
influence  that  once  belonged  to  the  greater  seats  of  learning.  In 
other  places,  the  amount  of  power  wielded  by  such  institutions  is 
much  diminished,  or  counteracted,  by  the  operation  of  other  agen- 
cies. But,  in  general,  the  schools,  higher  and  lower,  are  felt,  in 
every  land  where  they  exist,  to  be  no  mean  agencies  in  the  dis- 
semination of  sentiments,  and  in  the  formation  of  character. 
Governments,  whether  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  Protestant  or  Roman 
Catholic,  are  fully  aware  of  this.  The  debates  in  the  senate,  the 
discussions  in  church  courts,  and  tlte  conflict  often  maintained 
between  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  powers  about  such  institutions, 
show  the  vast  importance  attached  to  them  as  agencies  in  mould- 


THE    SCHOOLS.  287 

ing  the  mind  of  the  people.  Men  who  wish  to  give  the  streams 
a  particular  tinge  or  turn,  fight  for  the  possession  of  the  foun- 
tain. They  who  would  steer  the  ship  on  a  certain  track,  seek  the 
command  of  the  helm.  Be  it  the  disciple  of  Loyola,  eager  for  the 
universal  sway  of  the  church  of  which  he  is  a  devoted  son ;  or 
the  mere  politician,  careful  only  to  advance  his  schemes  of  state 
policy;  he  it  the  zealous  Cliristian  reformer,  heedless  of  party 
ends,  hut  anxious  ahove  all  things  to  leaven  society  witli  the  pure 
Gospel;  or  the  no  less  zealous  infidel,  who  would  wish  full  scope 
for  his  schemes  of  social  regeneration  ;  all  look  to  the  schools, 
the  educational  institutions,  as  the  levers  by  which  they  could 
move  and  influence  the  public  mind. 

It  is  one  of  the  cheering  signs  of  the  times,  that  the  state  of 
our  public  schools,  higher  and  lower,  is  occupying  so  much  the 
thoughts  of  patriotic  and  Christian  men.  The  amount  of  educa- 
tion comes  far  short  of  the  requirements  of  the  country,  and  the 
character  of  much  of  what  exists  is  eillier  inferior  in  itself  or  sm-- 
rounded  by  unhealthy  influences.  These  things  have  been  placed 
beyond  dispute,  by  the  Hejiort  of  the  Government  Connnission  of 
Inquiry.  The  secular  instruction  of  many  of  the  lower  schools  is 
glaringly  defective ;  while  notwithstanding  the  growing  improve- 
ment in  this  respect,  there  is  a  great  want  of  healthy,  vigorous, 
attractive,  religious  teaching.  Difliculties  indeed  beset  the  subject. 
But,  in  the  full  view  of  all  these  difliculties,  we  hold  by  the  clear  tan- 
gible principle,  that  the  religious  element  is  indispensable  to  a  sound 
and  elevating  system  of  education.  The  mode  in  wliich  religious 
instruction  has  been  imparted,  in  a  large  proportion  of  our  schools, 
has  been  far  from  satisfactory.  It  has  tended  to  make  young  peo- 
ple formalists  rather  than  to  inspire  them  with  a  loving  regard  for 
the  truths  of  Scripture.  This  fact  is  being  recognised  in  many 
quarters ;  and  the  more  excellent  way  is  being  followed  of  rescuing 
the  Bible  from  the  position  of  a  mere  task-book,  and  of  informing 
the  mind,  and  impressing  the  conscience,  with  its  histories,  doc- 
trines, and  precepts.  Tet  religion  be  shut  out  from  the  daily 
school,  and  irreligion  will  grow  up  and  abound,  just  as  weeds 
overrun  a  garden  which  is  not  properly  cropped  and  cultivated. 
Or,  let  religion  be  taught  merely  as  a  matter  of  dull  routine,  and  a 
habit  of  formalism  may  be  contracted,  which  it  may  take  much  to 
loosen.  Without  expecting  too  much  from  improved  systems  of 
education,  we  cannot  help  thinking  that,  had  the  religious  element 
in  teaching  occupied  in  our  schools,  generally,  the  genial  and  in- 
fluential place  which  it  ought  to  occupy,  young  men,  in  passing 
from  tffe  school  to  the  factory  or  workshop,  would  not  have  become 
so  often  tlie  prey  of  the  infidel. 

Many  of  the  higher  seminaries  of  the  countiy  are  renowned  for 
their  scholarship,  whence  many  young  persons  pertaining  to  the 
educated  classes  are  drafted  oft'  every  year  to  the  universities.  Not 


288  THE    SCHOOLS. 

a  few  distir.^uisliecl  Christian  teachers  are  to  he  found  in  some  of 
these  schools.  Jiut.  as  has  recently  been  remarked,  "  their  presence 
does  not  suffice  to  create  a  Christian  atmosphere.  Their  influence 
is  neuti-alized  by  the  contrary  influence  of  others."*  Upwards  of 
fi\^e  and  twenty  years  acfo,  the  want  of  any  thing  like  a  systematic 
effort  to  give  a  thoroughly  Christian  character  to  the  education  of 
the  higher  classes  was.  in  many  quarters,  keenly  felt.  It  was 
about  this  period  that  Dr.  Arnold  was  elected  to  Rugby,  where  he 
bec;-an  to  practis3.  what  he  so  energetically  advocated,  making  our 
public  schools  places  of  a  real  Christian  education.  He  en- 
deavoured to  create,  (the  absence  of  which  seemed  to  him  the 
great  cause  of  all  the  evil.)  a  ])ublic  opinion  among  the  scholars 
themselves  in  favour  nf  decidedly  Christian  principles,  so  that  each 
nevv  coiner  mi^^ht  find  himself  at  once  in  a  healthy  moral  atmo- 
sphere. The  testimony  of  Dr.  Maberly.  head-master  of  Winchester, 
at  once  shows  the  religious  influences  of  many  of  our  public 
schools  at  the  period  referred  to,  and  the  beneficial  change  intro- 
duced by  the  great  and  good  Arnold.  "The  tone  of  young  men 
at  the  university,"  he  remarks,  "  whether  they  came  from  Win- 
chester, Eton,  Rugby,  Harrow,  or  wherever  else,  was  universally 
irreligious.  A  religious  under-graduate  was  very  rare,  very  much 
laughed  at  when  he  ap]ieared.  and  I  think  I  may  say  hardly  to  be 
found  among  ])ublic-s(;hool  men ;  or,  if  this  be  too  strongly  ex- 
pressed, hardly  to  be  found  except  in  cases  where  private  and 
domestic  training,  or  good  dispositions,  had  prevailed  over  the 
school  habits  and  tendencies."  "Dr.  Arnold's  pupils,"  he  adds, 
"  were  thoughtful,  manly-minded,  conscious  of  duty  and  obli^-ation, 
when  they  first  came  to  college."!  Genuine  religion  has,  oi  late 
years,  been  progressing  a  nong  the  higher  classes  of  our  country, 
and  while  improvement  has  been  carried  into  the  schools,  that 
improvement  lias  not  been  so  thorough  and  beneficent  as  Christian 
parents  would  wish,  for  the  sake  of  their  sons,  that  it  were.  En- 
ligiitened.  liberal,  good  men.  still  complain,  that  Eton,  Harrow, 
Rugby,  and  other  ]>ublic  schools,  want  that  supremacy  of  the 
Christian  influence,  without  which  the  sons  of  the  educated  classes 
will  lie  oi)en  to  the  inroads  of  infidelity. 

0.s.ford  and  Cambridge  rise  up  before  the  mind  at  once,  in  pro- 
cee  I  ng  to  notice  tlie  universities  of  England.  With  these  vene- 
rab'  seats  of  learning,  are  associated  some  of  the  greatest  names 
that  have  adorned  tiie  British  senate  and  the  British  churches, 
and  tbat  have  given  our  country  a  world-wide  renown  for  its 
brilliant  literature  and  scientific  achievements.  Here  the  scions 
of  our  nobility  are  tauglit,  and  receive,  in  a  great  measuft,  their 
mental  moulding.  Aiul  here,  as  the  schools  of  the  prophets,  the 
youth  of  every  rank,  destined  to  fill  the  jjulpits  of  the  English 

*  Evnnarflirnl  riiriatenrlom,  vol.  vi.  p.  9-1. 
+  Stanley's  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Arnold,  vol.  ii. 


THE    SCHOOLS,  289 

Establishment,  imbibe,  for  the  most  part,  those  principles  which 
tliey  are  henceforth  to  disseminate  over  the  length  and  breadth  of 
the  land.  The  great  influence  of  the  teaching  of  these  schools  on 
tlie  English  mind,  from  the  peer  down  to  the  peasant,  is  obvious. 
It  is  true  that  their  power,  for  good  or  evil,  is  not  so  great  as  when 
they  furnished  nearly  all  the  instruction  that  Avas  given  td^he 
educated  youth  of  our  country. =-  The  Nonconformists,  who  are 
excluded  by  statute  from  these  old  universities,  have  their  aca- 
demic institutions  in  considerable  numbers  and  efficiency,  and 
presided  over  by  men,  many  of  whom  would  adom  the  chairs  of 
Oxford  or  Cambridge.  But  as  the  mountains  rise  above  the  hills, 
so  are  these  two  ancient  seats  of  learning  among  the  more  modern 
schools  that  possess  the  land.  They  are  still  entitled  to  tlieir  old 
distinctive  a])pellation — the  eyes  of  England,  however  mucL  these 
eyes  need  to  be  purged. 

It  is  not  of  their  ancient  glory,  but  of  their  recent  influence,  and 
that  especially  in  its  bearing  on  our  common  Scriptural  Chris- 
tianity, that  we  speak:  And  truth  demands  the  statement  that  these 
two  schools,  which  once,  as  Thomas  Fuller,  in  his  filial  regard, 
says,  "  became  the  fruitful  nurseries  of  Protestant  worthies,  to  the 
envy  and  admiration  of  all  Christendom,"-}-  have,  of  late,  to  a  great 
extent,  proved  the  hot-beds  of  Komanism  and  of  an  infidel  senti- 
mentalism.  Sir  W.  Hamilton  has  said,  "the  nearest  approxima- 
tion to  the  learned  freedom  of  the  German  divines,  and  the  most 
enthusiastic  encomiasts  of  their  writings,  have  been  found  among 
the  English  clergy,  and  in  that  clergy,  among  the  teachers  and 
dignitaries  of  the  English  universities."!  These  twp  enemies  — 
rationalism  and  semi-Popery — have  been,  and  still  are,  the  besetting 
dangers  of  the  English  clergy,  and  no  wonder,  considering  the  coun- 
tenance they  have  received  in  the  high  places  of  learning.  Men  in 
the  situations,  and  v/ith  the  authority  of  Lloyd  and  Marsh,  (the  for- 
mer many  years  ago  professor  of  Hebrew  in  Cambridge,  the  latter 
late  Margaret  professor  of  divinity  in  the  same  university.)  endea- 
voured to  promote  the  study  of  Eichhorn  and  his  school  among 
the  academic  youth.  Great  has  been  the  joy  in  the  Vatican  at 
Oxford  tendencies,  and  the  chiefs  of  "  our  Lord,  the  Pope,"  did  not 
fail  to  repair  to  the  banks  of  the  Isis  to  express  it.  "  Most  sincerely 
and  unafl'ectedly,"  said  the  "  Catholic  Magazine,"  a  few  years  ago, 
''  do  we  tender  our  congratulations  to  our  brethren  of  Oxford,  that 

*  The  Oxford  Coniniission  TJeport  estimates  the  number  of  students  actually 
resident  in  Oxford  at  the  present  time  to  be  about  1,300  ;  whicli  is  a  gieater  niuu- 
ber  than  at  any  time  in  the  last  two  centuries.  The  number  of  studf  nts  at  Cam- 
bridge  is  greater.  Mr.  Hallam  remarks  (Europe  during  the  Middle  Ages,  vid.  iii. 
p.  526)  that  "  at  Oxford  under  Henry  III.,  it  is  said  that  there  were  30,000 
scholars ;  an  exaggeration  wnich  seems  to  imply  that  the  real  number  was  very 
great." 

+  Fuller's  Histoi7  of  the  University  of  Cambridge. 

J  Sii-  W,  Hamilton's  Discussions,  pp.  507, 5C8. 

T3 


290  THE    SCHOOLS. 

their  eyes  have  been  opened  to  the  evils  of  ])nvate  judgment,  and 
the  consequent  necessity  of  curbing  its  multiform  extravagance." 
The  quaint  historian  of  the  University  of  Cambridge,  tells  of  a 
grave  divine  preaching  before  the  university,  at  St.  Mary's,  more 
than  two  centuries  ago,  who  had  this  "  smart  passage"  in  his  ser- 
mo#:  "  That,  as  at  the  Olympian  games  he  was  counted  the  con- 
queror who  could  drive  his  chariot  wheels  nearest  the  mark,  yet  so 
as  not  to  hinder  his  running,  or  to  stick  thereon, 

metaque  fervidis 

ETitata  rotis; 

so  be  who  in  his  sermons  could  preach  near  popery,  and  yet  no 
popery,  '  there  was  your  man.' "  This,  Dr.  Fuller  follows  up  by  a 
remark  applicable  to  our  own  time:  "It  now  began  to  be  the 
general  complaint  of  most  moderate  men,  that  many  in  the  uni- 
versity, both  in  the  schools  and  pulpits,  approached  the  opinions 
of  the  church  of  Rome  nearer  than  ever  before."  Many  of  our 
modern  university  charioteers  have  been  running  a  like  course. 
Not  a  few,  however,  have  driven  the  chariot  wheels  up  to  the 
mark,  and  have  stuck  thereon.  Open  desertions  to  the  chiu'ch  of 
Rome,  the  result  for  the  most  part  of  luiiversity  teaching,  have 
taken  place ;  and,  as  one  of  her  distinguished  evangelical  ministers 
has  recently  said,  "enough  remain  behind,  tainted  with  the  same 
principles,  and  imbued  with  the  same  doctrines,  to  make  the  Church 
of  England  like  a  camp  divided  against  itself,  where  two  parties, 
representing  the  Middle  Age  and  the  Reformation,  ai-e  in  open  and 
almost  deadly  hostility  one  to  the  other." -i= 

The  English  Universities,  as  regards  pecuniary  endowments,  are 
the  wealthiest  in  Europe;  but,  in  contrast  with  this,  is  their 
inefficiency  in  advancing  the  cause  of  an  enlarged  and  healthy 
education.  They  have,  in  this  respect,  come  to  be  looked  upon 
rather  as  counteractives;  than  as  auxiliaries.  The  physical 
sciences  at  Oxford  have  long  been  in  a  depressed  condition.  The 
Tutorial  system  has  absorbed  the  Professorial.  Distinguished 
professors  of  astronomy,  geology,  and  other  branches  of  physical 
science,  can  scarcely  form  a  class.  But  the  crying  evil  is  the  want 
of  efficient  theological  training.  It  is  as  a  school  of  sacred  learning 
— a  chief  avenue  to  the  ministry  of  the  Established  Church — that 
Oxford  is  to  be  regarded  ;  and  vrith  ample  means  for  theological 
teaching — the  theological  chairs  being  the  best  endowed  in  the 
University — theology  itself,  as  was  shown  in  the  evidence  before 
the  University  Commission, is  there  at  a  low  ebb.  "No  efficient 
means,"  says  the  invaluable  report,  "  at  present  exist  in  the  Uni- 
versity for'  training  candidates  for  holy  orders  in  those  studies 
which  belong  peculiarly  to  their  profession.     .     .     The  University 

*  The  Religions  Condition  of  Chnstendom,  p.  149. 


THE    SCHOOLS.  291 

must  be  to  blame  if  tbeological  studies  languish.  Few  of  the 
clergy  apply  themselves  in  earnest  to  the  study  of  Hebrew.  Eccle- 
siastical History,  some  detached  portions  excepted,  is  unknown  to 
the  great  majority.  The  history  of  doctrines  has  scarcely  been 
treated  in  this  country.  It  may  be  safely  stated,  that  the  epistles 
of  St.  Paul  have  not 'been  studied  critically  by  the  great  bulk  of 
those  in  Orders."=:=  The  theology,  which  has  found  favour  at  the 
Alma  Mater  of  Laud  and  Sacheverel,  is  patristic  rather  than 
Biblical.  The  spirit  of  the  Reformation  has  all  along  had  to 
struggle  there  with  the  evil  genius  of  a  modified  popery.  Oxford, 
more  than  ever,  has  become  the  great  school  of  a  corrupt  theology. 
It  is  this  theology  that  we  rank  among  the  anti-Christian  systems 
of  the  age ;  and  Oxford,  the  seat  of  its  strength,  we  look  upon  as 
having  gained  an  unenviable  distinction  among  British  schools, 
in  doing  service  on  the  side  of  evil. 

We  need  not  enter  into  any  minute  details  of  the  Tractarian 
heresy.  It  is  not  a  system  shrouded  in  mystery.  The  Oxford 
writers  have  fully  enunciated  it  in  tract  after  tract.     Their  disciples 

Promulgate  it  week  after  week  from  many  of  the  pul])its  of  the  land, 
t  has  been  battled  with  both  by  great  men  and  small.  The  goodly 
octavo  volume,  the  brilliant  review,  the  little  pamphlet,  have  ex- 
posed this  great  foe  of  Scriptural  Christianity,  driven  it  crest-fallen 
from  the  pre-eminence  to  which  it  was  aspiring  in  literature;  if 
not,  in  other  respects,  having  checked  its  march.  It  is  a  corrupt- 
ing and  destructive  bastard  in  the  church  of  the  Reformation — a 
system  of  spiritual  despotism,  of  awful  delusion,  tending  to  under- 
mine the  very  foundations  of  evangelical  truth,  and  social  morality. 
The  spirit  of  her  Reformers  frowns  upon  it.  It  gives  the  lie  to  her 
doctrinal  articles,  and  is  much  more  to  be  dreaded  than  an  avowed 
infidel  enemy.  It  may  have  been  one  of  the  forms  of  reaction 
against  the  materialism  of  the  age,  but  compared  with  the  spiritual 
Christianity  of  the  New  Testament,  it  is  gross  materialism  itself. 
It  may  have  originated  in  a  reviving  earnestness,  and,  as  the 
author  of  the  '  Nemesis  of  Faith'  declares,  "  in  a  desire  of  the 
church  to  win  back  the  love  of  her  children,  to  draw  them  from 
doing  to  praying,  from  early  hours  in  the  office,  or  in  the  field, 
to  matins  and  daily  service."!  But,  like  every  form  of  corrupt 
Christianity,  it  is  likely  to  foster  infidelity  under  its  ecclesiastical 
pageantry,  and  provoke  the  spiiit  of  an  infidel  reaction  against  the 
despotism  which  it  imposes. 

Such  is  the  influence  exerted  by  the  Oxford  school.  From  the 
bosom  of  this  university,  have  gone  forth  large  numbers  of  the  guides 
and  teachers  of  the  people,  impregnated  with  a  set  of  religious 
principles  alike  opposed  to  the  church  under  whose  shadow  thty 
abide,  and  destructive  of  that  Gospel  whose  ministers  they  profess 

*  Oxford  Commission  ■Report,  p.  71  (1852). 
+  Nemesis  of  Faith,  p.  154. 

u  2 


292  THE    SCHOOLS. 

to  be.  This  anti-scriptural  influence  is  brought  to  bear  r/eek  after 
week,  and  day  after  day,  on  many  of  the  schools  and  churches  in 
our  English  towns  and  rural  parishes.  Nor  is  the  heart  of  the  eAdI 
less  active  in  its  movements  than  it  was,  now  that  the  excitement 
of  the  first  battle  is  past.  "  A  voice  from  Oxford,"  whose  witness 
is  true,  has  said,  "  Many  seem  to  think  that  the  influence  of  the 
Romanizing  party  in  the  University  is  on  the  decline,  and  that 
their  doctrines  have  fallen  into  disrepute  ;  but  it  is  far  otherwise. 
Open  aggression,  on  their  part,  may  not  be  so  rife  as  during  the 
publication  of  the  Tracts  for  the  Times ;  but  their  action  is 
perhaps  more  vigorous  tlian  ever,  and  their  quiescence  only  appar- 
ent. A  great  portion  of  the  young  clergy,  and  of  those  looking 
forward  to  holy  Orders,  while  professedly  deriving  healthful 
nourishment  from  their  Alma  Mater,  drink  in  the  poisonous 
heresy ;  and,  when  scattered  over  the  length  and  breadth  of  the 
land,  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  they  will  be  inactive  or  indiffer- 
ent to  the  propagation  of  those  Romish  doctrines  and  principles 
with  which  they  have  been  impregnated." 

It  is  a  significant  fact,  and  tells  on  what  side  oiu*  old  English 
universities  are  doing  service,  that  within  a  short  period,  about  a 
hundred  members  of  Oxford  and  fifty  of  Cambridge  have  passed 
over  to  the  Romish  communion.  The  great  modern  satirist  has 
said,  "  according  to  the  ancient  proverb,  '  every  road  leads  to  Rome,' 
but  the  nearest  way  is  the  Tracts  through  Oxford."  "  Newmanism," 
said  Dr  Arnold,  when  the  water  was  just  letting  out,  "  Newman- 
ism, I  suppose,  will  grow  and  grow,  till  it  provokes  a  reaction  of 
infidelity."  The  reaction  has  begun.  The  house  has  been  divided 
against  itself.  In  the  brothers  Newman,  not  to  mention  others, 
we  see  the  double  workings  of  the  system.  A  large  and  increasing 
party  has  shot  over  to  Rome;  a  smaller,  but  still  an  increasing, 
party  has  been  drifted  on  till  they  landed  in  unbelief.  The  evil 
is  great.  Oxford  is  giving  to  our  country,  and  sending  abroad, 
the  religion  of  man  for  the  religion  of  God.  And  whatever  glory 
from  the  past  may  encircle  her,  she  now  occupies  the  bad  pre-emi- 
nence among  British  schools,  in  corrupting  the  truth  of  Christ. 

The  educational  institutions  in  the  northern  part  of  the  island, 
whatever  may  be  their  imperfections  otherwise,  are  not  chargeable, 
in  our  day  at  least,  of  exerting  any  direct  influence  tliat  is 
adverse  to  Bible  Christianity.  Scotland  as  a  nation,  has  long  oc- 
cupied a  proud  position  among  the  other  civilized  nations  of  the 
world,  for  the  religious  intelligence  of  her  people.  This  doubtless 
has  been  partly  owing  to  her  parish  schools,  which,  bowever  sec- 
tarian now  in  their  character,  and  needing  to  be  adapted  to  the 
wants  of  the  age,  have  been,  in  some  measure,  the  means  of  ground- 
ing her  youth  in  scriptural  knowledge  to  an  extent  which  strikingly 
contrasts  with  the  southern  division  of  the  country.  Scotland  lias 
liad  her  systems  of  rank  scepticism  and  infidelity,  which  have  told 


THE    SCHOOL?.  H'Jo 

for  evil  far  beyoud  her  own  land,  and  throughout  generations  ; 
but  these  have,  generally,  been  found  without  the  pale  of  her  high 
seats  of  learning,  and,  in  her  famed  schools,  have  met  with  their 
stoutest  antagonists. 

But  our  northern  universities  cannot  be  altogether  exempted 
from  the  charge  of  having  done  some  service  on  the  wrong  side. 
Their  moral  philosophies,  like  tlie  moral  philosophies  of  the  age 
in  general,  have  too  much  ignored  Christianity  as  a  remedial  system, 
if  they  have  not  placed  themselves  in  antagonism  to  it.  And  wo 
cannot  but  regard  it  as  a  disastrous  thing,  that  the  lessons  of  the 
moraf  teacher,  if  not  given  from  under  the  shadow  of  the  cross, 
should  fail  to  point  the  way  to  it.  The  great  sin  of  them  all,  as 
has  often  been  noticed,  has  been  the  want  of  a  distinct  recognition 
of  human  depravity ;  and  in  failing  to  conduct  their  disciples  to 
such  a  turn  at  the  end  of  tlie  road,  as  that  on  looking  up  they 
might  at  once  see  the  finger-post  tliat  points  to  the  faith  and  hope 
of  "the  Gospel.  The  theological  chiiirs,  both  in  the  endowed  and 
unendowed  schools,  have  often  felt  it  necessary,  in  their  prelections, 
to  counteract  the  influence  of  such  adverse  teaching,  instead  of 
being  free  to  treat  at  once  of  the  grand  reiuedy,  the  way  to  which 
should  at  least  have  been  indicated  by  the  moral  prelections.  The 
ethical  chairs  of  some  of  our  Scottish  schools,  have  been  filled  by 
men  of  a  more  than  European  reputation ;  but  in  their  systems, 
generally,  ethics  have  been  very  mucli  divorced  from  Christianity, 
and  attempts  have  been  made  to  build  up  and  complete  the  one 
without  the  other. 

But  this  is  not  all.  It  is  matter  of  fact  that,  at  the  close  of  last 
century,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  present,  the  period  when  a 
baptized  pagan  philosophy  held  place  in  our  Scottish  schools,  an- 
appalling  deadness  had,  to  a  considerable  extent,  crept  over  the- 
church  establishment.  A  cold  inoperative  morality  was  substi- 
tuted for  the  spirit  and  life  of  the  Gospel.  Gross  heresies  were 
winked  at,  or  softly  admonished,  by  the  supreme  ecclesiastical 
judicatories.  Men  held  an  orthodox  creed  in  their  hands  which 
they  had  solemnly  vowed  to  exhibit,  while  doctrines  dropped  ft-om 
their  lips  which  tended  to  destroy  or  cast  it  aside.  The  state  of 
the  universities  at  tliat  period  is  made  known  by  one  who  speaks- 
from  personal  experience.  Dr.  Chahners,  speaking  of  the  oldest 
of  these  venerable  seats  of  learning,  says,  "  St.  Andrew's  was,  at 
this  time  (end  of  last  century),  overrun  with  Moderatism,  under 
the  cliilling  influences  of  which  we  inhaled,  not  a  distaste  only, 
but  a  positive  contempt  for  all  that  is  properly  and  peculiarly 
gos]iel;  insomuch  that  our  confidence  was  nearly  as  entire  in  the 
sufficiency  of  natural  theology,  as  in  the  sufficiency  of  natiu'al 
science."  The  biographer  of  the  great  and  good  man  remarks, 
that  from  this  religious  lapse  into  which  he  had  been  seduced  at 
his  Alma  Mater,  '•  it  needed  many  years,  and  other  than  human 


294  THE    SCHOOLS. 

influences  to  recall  liim.">:=  This  case,  of  itself,  shows  the  moral 
power  which  a  university  exerts  on  young  and  ardent  minds,  filled 
with  enthusiasm  for  its  studies  and  charmed  with  its  associations; 
and  leaves  us  to  imagine  how  many  who  have  sat  under  the 
shadow  of  such  seats  of  learning,  may  have  imhibed  a  similar 
disrelish  for  spiritual  Christianity;  and  hoAV  wide-spread  it  maj 
have  been,  and  how  disastrous  its  influence,  if  not  overcome  hj 
another  and  a  mightier  influence  than  human.  We  are  not  for- 
getful, however,  of  the  greater  agency  of  our  Scottish  schools  for 
good,  while  we  make  mention  of  their  agency,  especially  in  the 
past,  for  evil.  Nor  can  we  forbear  adverting  to  the  fact  that  the 
logical  and  metaphysical  chair  of  Edinburgh  is.  at  the  present  day, 
filled  by  the  most  distinguished  philosopher  of  the  age,  and  that 
his  philosophy  is  at  once  profound  and  healthy,  counteractive  of 
scepticism  and  subservient  to  truth. 

But  let  us  turn  to  Continental  Europe.  There  infidelity,  in  its 
many  forms,  comes  more  broadly  and  palpably  before  our  view ; 
and  there  the  influence  of  the  schools  is  more  powerfully  exerted 
on  the  side  of  it.  In  every  thing  relating  to  language,  science, 
and  art,  the  educational  institutions  of  France  might  be  said  to  be 
almost  perfect.  These  departments,  with  their  full  complement  of 
sections,  leave  nothing  wanting,  viewed  merely  as  a  great  system 
of  human  knowledge.  But  the  wisdom  that  cometh  from  above 
has  little  or  no  part  in  it,  Christianity,  as  a  remedial  economy,  is 
either  disowned  by  French  philosophy,  or  the  theological  faculty, 
which  should  represent  it,  is  dedicated  not  to  the  pure  and  un- 
defiled.  but  to  the  corrupt  form.  Philosophy,  in  the  schools  of 
France,  has  been  allied  either  with  a  gross  materialism  or  a  proud 
spiritualism ;  and,  in  either  case,  has  had  an  influence  adverse  to 
the  truth  of  God.  During  the  latter  half  of  last  century,  and  the 
early  part  of  the  present,  an  infidel  sensationalism  sat  in  the  high 
places  of  learning  and  gave  forth  its  oracles.  This  became  the 
predominant  doctrine  in  France;  and  from  it  Voltaire  and  the 
Encyclopaedists  deduced  those  gross  infidel  principles  which  deso- 
lated the  land.  For  the  last  twenty-five  years.  Cousin,  the  eloqnent 
"apostle  of  Rationalism  in  France,"  and  others  of  the  Eclectic 
school,  have  been  inculcating,  in  the  Ecole  Normale,  at  Paris,  a 
system  much  more  favourable  to  pantheism  than  to  the  Christian 
revelation ;  and  have  raised  up  not  a  few  instructors  to  dissemi- 
nate the  same  throughout  the  country.  The  Jesuits  in  France,  at 
the  present  day,  are  striving  to  get  the  schools  of  every  grade 
completely  under  their  control.  Government,  by  its  concessions 
to  the  clerical  power,  has  opened  the  door  to  them.  Ultramon- 
tanism  is  in  the  ascendant.  The  university  has  become  subser- 
vient to   Romanism.      Protestant   schools,    in    consequence   of 

*  Hanna's  Life  of  Chalmers,  vol.  i.  p.  15. 


THE    SCHOOLS.  295 

Piomish  interference,  have  to  struggle  with  a  load  of  difficulties ; 
while  the  educational  institutions  in  general,  and  the  village 
schools  especially,  are  wielded  for  advancing  a  corrupt  religious 
system,  which  in  turn  provokes  a  reaction  in  favour  of  infidelity. 

In  Germany,  the  university  life  is  seen  to  be  all-important,  and 
the  teaching  of  the  professors  to  be  greatly  influential.  The  gi-eat 
religious  movements  that  have  ever  and  anon  blessed  the  German 
fatherland,  are  to  be  traced  up  to  the  seats  of  learning.  It  was  so 
in  the  past,  and  it  is  so  at  the  present  day.  But  if  the  German 
schools  have  the  credit  of  those  revivals  that  have  been  as  streams 
in  the  desert*,  they  have  also  the  unenviable  renown  of  having 
been  the  chief  agencies  in  sending  abroad  that  amount  of  infi- 
delity which  has  desolated  both  the  church  and  the  state.  It  is  an 
unquestionable  fact  that,  at  the  beginning  of  the  present  centuiy, 
the  schools  of  every  grade  were,  almost  without  exception,  under 
the  influence  of  men  whose  opinions  were  adverse  to  Scriptural 
Christianity.  Eationalistic  teachers  presided  over  the  elementary 
schools.  There  the  truth,  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  was  gradually  under- 
mined. The  German  youth  imbibed  infidelity  with  their  earliest 
lessons,  and  hence  the  readiness  of  the  adult  population  to  abjure 
the  very  symbols  of  the  Christian  faith.  Tholuck  tells  us  that, 
even  in  boyhood,  infidelity  had  forced  its  way  into  his  heart,  and 
that  at  the  age  of  twelve  he  was  wont  to  scoff  at  Christianity 
And  how  decided  must  have  been  the  infidel  spirit  that  pervaded 
the  schools,  when  it  happened  not  only  that  his  unbelief  strength- 
ened during  his  stay  at  the  Gymnasium,  but  that,  on  leaving  it, 
he  was  suffered  to  maintain,  in  an  oration,  the  superiority  of 
Mahomedanism  to  Christianity.  This  case  is  somewhat  solitary 
only  on  account  of  the  illustrious  name  associated  with  it.  Thou- 
sands, unknown  to  fame,  who  have  lived  and  died  infidels,  could 
Lave  pointed  to  the  lower  and  higher  schools  as  the  agencies  of 
their  unbelief.  And,  at  the  present  day,  in  which  infidelity  is  still 
so  prevalent,  if  the  faithful  men  in  Germany  are  asked  to  account 
for  such  a  general  abandonment  of  the  faith  by  the  male  popula- 
tion, they  at  once  refer,  among  other  agencies,  to  the  infidel  influ- 
ences of  the  schools.  Many  of  the  schoolmasters  in  the  country 
parishes,  and  the  higher  teachers  in  the  gjmmasia,  are  decided 
rationalists,  who,  though  undfer  the  necessity  of  using  the  Bible, 
accompany  their  teachings  with  such  comments  as  tend  to  make 
their  scholars  avowed  unbelievers.  Institutions,  designed  to  instil 
into  the  minds  of  youth  the  principles  of  Christian  truth,  have 
thus,  in  a  great  measure,  become  nurseries  of  the  most  withering 
scepticism  f . 

*  e.  g.  Wittemberg  prorlucecl  the  Refonnation  ;  Halle,  under  Francke's  influ- 
ence, i)f  came  a  source  of  life  to  the  German  churches. 

+  "  Pedagopf^',"  say3  Dr.  Krummacher,  "  in  respect  to  evangelical  faith,  has  not 
kept  pace  with  theology;  on  the  contrary-,  the  rationalist  maxims  of  Dinter  and 
Diesterweg  continue  to  prevail  ia  most  of  the  elementary  schools.  . . .  The  people 


29'J  THE    SCHOOLS. 

The  uuiversities  also,  aboatthe  heginning  of  the  present  centiirj, 
and  till  within  the  last  few  years  {in  wliich  a  decided  change  has 
taken  place,  especially  in  the  theological  faculty),  were  almost  en- 
tirely exerting  the  same  evil  influence.  In  a  former  part  of  this 
essay,  we  have  spoken  of  the  hitter  fruits  which  the  German 
speculative  philosophy  has  borne  in  the  field  of  German  theolog3^ 
It  is  to  an  extreme  philosophical  influence,  we  have  seen,  that  all 
the  rationalistic  and  pantheistic  views,  which  have  been  developed 
by  the  German  theologians,  are  to  be  ascribed.  Tliat  influence 
has  had  its  chief  seat  in  the  universities.  Hegel,  whose  philosophy 
destro3'ed  the  personality  of  God,  and  included  in  its  sweep  of 
necessary  development,  the  whole  Christian  doctrine,  occupied  for 
many  years  an  influential  position  in  the  imiversity  of  Berlin. 
Here  he  developed  to  a  number  of  admiring  pupils  that  system 
which,  being  carried  into  the  province  of  theology,  has  swept  away 
a  historical  Christianity.  He  supplied  from  his  armoury  the 
weapons  which  such  daring  men  as  Strauss,  Feuerbach,  and  Bruno 
Bauer,  have  wielded  on  the  side  of  the  most  determined  unbelief. 
The  success  which  attended  his  lectures  is  said  to  have  been  great, 
and  their  influence  has  told  disastrously  on  the  German  churches 
and  people. 

While  Berlin  was  thus  fostering  and  sending  forth  a  pantheistic 
philosophy,  Halle,  the  first  theological  university  in  the  land,  was 
occupied  by  neological  professors.  Y\^egscheider  was  propounding 
to  the  future  ministers  of  the  church  the  lowest  rationalism,  and 
Gesenius,  the  corypheus  of  Hebrew  literature,  was  stripping  the 
Old  Testament  of  its  divine  glory."=  Heidelberg,  Gottingen,  Jena, 
and  other  universities,  were  lending  their  influence  to  the  same 
side  of  avowed  hostility  to  spiritual  Christianity.  The  celebrated 
rationalistic  professor.  Dr.  Paulus,  was  the  presiding  mind  over  the 
first  of  these  seats  of  learning.  A  large  number  of  the  pulpits 
throughout  the  land  were  occupied  by  his  disciples.  From  the 
chair  he  had  gone  on,  for  years,  expounding  to  them,  or  rather 
explaining  away,  the  marvellous  facts  of  the  New  Testament.  The 
Gospels,  in  his  hands,  lost  all  their  miraculous  character,  and  the 

in  general  are  continually  nourished  with  the  milk  of  the  old  false  enlightening, 
and  robbed  in  the  school-room  of  that  good  which  they  perhaps  receive  m  the 
catechumen  instruction.  The  teachers  of  the  higher  schools,  particularly  of  the 
grammar-schools,  are,  for  the  most  part,  either  addicted  to  pantheistic  philosophy, 
or  altogetlier  indifferent  to  religion,  and  fully  satisfied  with  the  ideas  of  their 
Socrates  and  Plato."  —  The  Relif/ious  Condition  of  Chrisipndom,  p.  428-9.  (18-52.) 

*  Dr.  Uobinson,  who  attended  Gesenius'  lectures  in  the  winter  of  1829-30,  says: 
"Halle  is  the  favourite  resort  of  almost  all  the  followers  of  rationalism,  who,  at 
the  present  day,  constitute  a  very  large  class  among  the  theological  students.  .  . 
Eationalism,  through  the  exertions  of  Wegscheider,  the  countenance  of  Gesenius, 
and  the  indiffe--ence  of  Niemever,  had  obtained  firm  footing,  and  seduced  the 
understandings  of  the  great  bodv  of  the  students."  As  an  instance  of  the  influence 
of  Gesenius,  it  is  stated  that  when  he  began  his  course  on  Genesis,  which  he 
treated  a<^  a  mere  collection  of  myths  or  fables,  he  had  only  fourteen  hearers,  hut 
at  the  period  referred  to  he  was  addr'^ssing  five  hundred.— Robiiison's  Concise 
View  oj'  Ike  German  Uniccrsiiics,  ^-c.  p.  2(3,  36,  &c. 


THE    SCHOOLS.  207 

mighty  works  of  the  great  teacher  sent  from  God  were  accounted 
for  on  purely  natural  principles.  The  influence  of  this  one  j^ro- 
fessor,  in  strengthening  and  extending  infidelity  within  the  church, 
was  very  great.  He  is  reputed  to  have  been  the  chief  agent  in 
propagating  unbelief  throughout  Baden  and  the  Avhole  palatinate 
of  the  Khine.  A  number  of  such  men  of  learning  and  influence 
scattered  throughout  the  colleges  and  seminaries  of  Germany,  and 
employed  incessantly  in  instilling  into  the  minds  of  the  future 
teachers  of  the  people  principles  involving  the  denial  of  all  that 
is  supernatural  in  Christianity,  must  have  contributed  much  of 
that  infidelity  which  twenty  or  thirty  years  ago  deluged  the  land, 
and  which  covers  nnich  of  the  country  still. 

Berlin  and  Halle  have,  for  some  yeai's,  possessed  a  strong  evan- 
gelical element,  counteractive  of  the  low  rationalism  that  once 
reigned  almost  alone.  And  this  illustrates  the  powerful  influence 
which  a  professor  in  Germany  has  over  the  minds  of  his  disciples, 
and  the  great  responsibility  of  the  government  in  filling  up  the 
chau's.  Neander, — the  great,  the  good,  the  loved  Neander — who 
was  but  lately  at  the  head  of  the  theologi  cal  faculty  in  Berlin,  and 
who  for  long  had  to  battle,  almost  single-handed,  with  a  dominant 
rationalism,  has  beeu  instrumental  in  raising  up  a  noble  band  of 
men,  valiant  in  the  good  fight,  who,  with  himself,  have  lifted  up  a 
standard,  and  in  some  measure  driven  back  the  flood  of  the  enemy. 
Tholuck,  whose  hallowed  zeal  is  very  much  the  effect  of  Neander's 
influence,  is,  as  a  son,  doing  at  Halle,  what  his  spiritual  father 
had  long  been  doing  at  Berlin.  The  influence  on  the  side  of 
Scriptural  truth  of  such  a  noble  corps  of  university  teachers  as 
Neander,  Hengstenberg,  Midler,  Tholuck,  and  others,  has  told, 
and  is  telling,  powerfully  for  good  on  the  churches  and  schools  of 
Germany.  But  what  a  vast  amount  of  low  rationalism  and  in- 
different'ism  have  they  had  to  strive  against,  a  considerable  portion 
of  which  must  be  laid  at  the  door  of  the  universities  and  other 
schools. =;' 

Holland  also  has  been  renovv-ned  for  its  seats  of  learning.     Sir 

*  Tlioluck,  speakinfT  recently  of  the  universities,  said :  "  If  Ave  look  back  to  the 
time  a  little  before  the  liberation  of  Germany  from  the  Frpnch  yoke,  with  the 
exception  of  Wurtember^',  we  may  say  that  there  were,  perhaps,  amongst  all  the 
rest  of  the  teachers  of  divinity,  not  more  than  three  or  four  that  may  be  called 
evangelical.  .  .  The  University  of  Halle— that  very  university  which  lias,  in  two 
memorable  periods  of  our  ecclesiastical  history,  decided,  as  it  were,  the  faith  of 
the  Protestant  religion  in  our  country,  and  which  numbered  during  a  long  period 
no  less  than  900  pupils  of  divinity— lay  entirely  in  the  darkness  of  Socinianism 
and  Unitarianism  ;  aTid  only  one  voice— it  was  a  timid  one,  but  yet  a  candid  one 
— was  lifted  up  nmong  the  professors  "  He  here  refersto  Professor  Kuapp,  who, 
in  a  letter  to  a  friend.inqniring  about  the  state  of  vital  Christianity  among  the 
large  number  of  nearly  lOTOdiviniiy  students,  replied  that  he  had  only  known  one 
f-tudent  whom  he  co  isidered  to  bo  ureal  Christian,  and  thit  he  came  from  the 
Moravians.  It  is  cheering  to  hear  fn  nr  Tholu'dt,  who  twenty-four  vears  before 
had  to  tell  nothing  but  sr.d  tidings  in  England,  that  a  glorious  change  has  taken 
place  in  tl;e  German  ui  iversities,  and  chieflv  in  Hulle.— See  "  The  Religious 
Condition  of  Christendom,"  p.  431-3  '1(^5?,) 


298  THE    SCHOOLS. 

W.  Hamilton  says  of  Leyden.  the  oldest  of  them,  she  "  has  been 
sm-passed  by  many  other  universities,  in  the  emoluments  and  in 
the  nmnber^of  her  chairs,  but  has  been  equalled  by  none  in  the 
aver;ige  eminence  of  her  professors.  Of  these,  the  obscurer  names 
■would  be  luminaries  in  many  other  schools ;  and  from  the  circle 
of  her  twelve  professors,  and  in  an  existence  of  two  hundred  years, 
she  can  select  a  more  numerous  company  of  a  higher  erudition 
than  can  be  found  among  the  public  teachers  of  any  other  semi- 
nary in  the  world. '"=i-  Affording,  as  Holland  once  did,  a  refuge  to 
our  persecuted  nonconforming  forefathers,  its  schools  were  much 
resorted  to  by  many  of  our  English  and  Scottish  students.  Ley- 
den. at  the  beginning  of  last  century,  was  famed  as  a  school  of 
Christian  theology.  John  a  Mark  and  Wesselius,  whose  teaching 
exerted  a  hallowing  influence  on  the  Dutch  Reformed  Church, 
adorned  its  chairs.  But  at  the  beginning  of  the  present  century, 
it  happened  with  the  schools  of  Holland  as  with  the  schools  of 
Germany.  Rationalism  attained  to  the  dominion  within  their 
walls.  Neological  professors  sent  forth  a  deformed  and  powerless 
Christianity  from  the  chairs  of  Leyden,  Groningen,  and  Utrecht. 
And  we  see  much  of  their  influence  in  the  low  state  of  religion 
throughout  the  land,  and  in  the  torpor  that  has,  in  a  great  mea- 
sure, crept  over  the  church.  There  are,  however,  hopeful  indica- 
tions of  a  re-awakening  of  the  religious  life  in  Holland.  The  Gos- 
pel is  progressing  among  all  classes.  But  the  true  Protestant 
faith  has  still  to  struggle  with  an  infidel  theology  as  taught  in  the 
universities,  especially  those  of  Groningen  and  Leyden. 

Geneva,  one  of  the  lights  of  the  world,  shows  also  the  powerful 
agency  exerted  by  a  theological  school.  Three  centuries  ago,  Cal- 
vin founded  that  celebrated  academy  in  which  he  and  Beza  taught, 
and  from  which  was  carried  that  sacred  fire  which  is  now  burning 
brightly  on  the  altars  of  other  lands.  But  at  the  end  of  last  cen- 
tury and  the  beginning  of  the  present,  wdien  the  adversaries  of  the 
truth  almost  everywhere  lengthened  their  cords  and  strengthened 
their  stakes,  a  unitarian  rationalism  enthroned  itself  in  the  sacred 
place,  and  held  dominion  over  the  church  and  state  of  Geneva. 
From  this  school,  where  the  illustrious  reformer  set  up  the  lamp 
of  heavenly  truth  that  shone  to  the  ends  of  the  civilized  world, 
proceeded  pastors  and  teachers  to  fill  the  pulpits  of  the  Genevese 
church,  who  had  been  taught  doctrines  opposed  alike  to  the  Refor- 
mation and  the  t)-uth  of  Scripture.  D'Aubigne,  G.aussen,  Malan, 
and  other  noble  men  who  are  doin<7  valiantly  in  the  war  against 
pernicious  error  and  on  the  side  of  Scriptural  Clu-istianity,  sat  at 
the  feet  of  a  divinity  professor  who,  in  a  great  measure,  substituted 
heathen  morality  for  Bible  truth,  and  preferred  Seneca  and  Plato 
as  oracles,  to  such  authorities  as  John  the  Evangelist  and  the 

*  Sii-  W.  Hamilton's  Discussions,  p.  364. 


THE    SCHOOLS.  299 

Apostle  Paul.*  The  excellent  Haldane,  on  Lis  arrival  in  Geneva 
in  the  year  1816,fonnd  the  students  deeply  sunk  in  Socinian  theo- 
logy; and  among  them  were  such  men  as  D'Aubigne  and  Adolph 
Monod,  whom  he  was  instrumental  in  leading  to  the  trutli.  The 
city  of  Calvin  has  had  for  some  years  in  such  men  as  tlie  author 
of  the  History  of  the  Eeformation,  and  the  author  of  Theopneustia, 
a  theological  school  worthy  of  the  great  reformer,  and  second  to 
none  in  the  world  for  talent  and  piety.  It  is  there,  as  Dr.  Cheever 
remarks,  "  that  D'Aubigne  first  utters  some  of  those  voices  of  truth 
and  freedom — those  declarations  of  independence  which  afterwards 
go  echoing  through  the  world."f  These  few,  but  noble-spiri:ed 
and  truly  great  reformers  of  the  nineteenth  century,  placed  as  they 
are  between  unitarian  rationalism  on  the  one  hand  and  despotic 
Jesuitism  on  tlie  other,  are  doing  good  service,  by  means  of  their 
theological  institute,  to  Christ's  cause  in  Geneva  and  in  other  parts 
of  the  Continent.  But,  as  regards  numerical  strength,  they  are 
like  Gideon  and  his  three  hundred  men  opposed  to  the  Midianites. 
The  Lord,  however,  is  with  them,  and  is  saying  unto  them,  "  Go  in 
this  your  might,  and  ye  shall  save  Israel  from  the  hand  of  the  Mi- 
dianites: have  not  I  sent  you?"  This  relieves  the  gloom,  but  it 
is  still  dense  and  disastrous.  Socinianism,  having  long  held  its 
place  in  the  Academy  and  the  Church,  aud  being  supported  by 
the  secular  arm,  has  left  the  way  open  for  a  reviving  Romanism,  or 
for  the  doctrines  of  Strauss.  It  is  from  this  rationalistic  school 
too,  be  it  observed,  that  the  French  Protestant  churches  have 
chiefly  derived  those  pastors  who  must  be  numbered  among  the 
rationalists  and  latitudinarians  whose  influence  is  adverse  to  spi- 
ritual Christianity.  Geneva  is  justly  regarded  as  one  of  the  most 
important  centres  of  influence  for  e'xtending  Christianity  on  the 
Continent.  But  if  we  look  to  the  New  Academy  as  an  eflectlve 
agency  in  diffusing  around  and  abroad  the  light  of  the  Gospel,  we 

*  M.  Bost,  who  in  1817  becanje  one  of  the  pastors  of  the  Evaupelical  Dissenting 
Church  then  formed,  thus  describes  the  course  of  instruction  through  which  the 
students  at  the  College  of  Geneva  had  to  pass.  He  is  writing  in  1825:  "  For  more 
than  thirty  years,  the  ministers  who  have  gone  out  of  our  schools  of  theology  to 
serve  either  the  churches  of  our  own  land,  or  those  of  France  and  other  foreign 
countries,  have  not  received  one  shigle  Icchire  on  the  truths  which  exclusively 
belong  to  revelation,  such  as  the  redemption  of  mankind  by  the  death  of  Christ, 
the  justification  of  the  sinner  by  lailh,  the  corruption  of  our  nature,  the  divinity 
of  our  Saviour,  &c.  In  theology  we  were  taught  nothing  but  what  are  called  the 
dogmas  of  natural  religion.  The  extent  to  which  this  practical  incredulity  was 
carried,  is  clear  from  the  fact—  elsewhere  unheard  of,  I  suspect,  in  the  annals  of 
the  Protestant  churches  —  that  excepting  for  a  lecture  in  the  Hebie w  language, 
when  the  Bible  was  used  simply  as  a  Hebrew  book,  and  not  for  anything  which  it 
contained,  the  word  of  God  svas  nevei'  used  throughout  our  course  ;  m  particular, 
the  New  Testament  never  appeared  either  as  a  language-book,  or  for  any  other  pur- 
pose ;  there  was  no  need  of  the  New  T.-stament  whatever,  in  order  to  complete  our 
four  years"  course  in  theology;  in  other  words,  that  book,  especially  in  the  ori- 
ginal, was  not  at  all  among  the  number  of  books  required  in  order  to  accomplish 
the  career  of  our  studies  for  the  sacred  ministry." —  See  Dr.  Alexandei's  Switzei-- 
land  and  the  Snixs  Churches,  p.  191. 

+  Cheever's  Wanderings,  p.  34. 


300  THE    PULPIT 

ranst  reckon  the  old  as  having  exerted  no  inconsiderable  power  on 
the  side  of  rationalism  and  infidelity. 

Our  survey  of  the  schools,  in  so  far  as  they  have  exerted  an  in- 
fluence hostile  to  the  Gospel  and  favourable  to  infidelity,  has  been 
far  from  complete.  But  it  has  been  extensive  enough  to  let  us  see 
that  they  have  been,  and  in  many  instances  are,  no  mean  agencies 
informing  and  disseminating  those  many-shaped  systems  of  un- 
belief which,  during  the  last  sixty  years  or  more,  have  been  ram- 
pant in  many  lands.  If  the  fountains  are  polluted  what  must  be 
the  streams  ?  And  how  great  the  responsibility  of  governments  in 
appointing  men  to  chairs  in  the  national  schools,  who,  by  their 
teach  in  gj  infuse  principles  into  the  minds  of  youth,  that  are  de- 
structive at  once  of  loyalty  to  the  powers  of  earth  and  of  devotion 
to  the  God  of  heaven.  Were  all  the  seats  of  learning  in  which  the 
human  sciences  arc  taught,  instrumental  in  guiding  the  minds  of 
their  disciples  aright,  instead  of,  as  has  often  been  the  case, 
grievously  perverting  them;  and  were  the  schools  which  are 
especially  designed  for  sacred  instruction,  made  reservoirs  of  the 
pure  river  of  the  water  of  life,  what  a  mighty  agency  for  good 
would  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  world.  Many  would  then  run 
to  and  fro,  and,  in  the  best  sense  of  the  expression,  knowledge 
would  be  increased.  "  A  Christianized  university,  in  i-espect  of 
its  professorships,"  says  Dr.  Chalmers,  "  would  be  to  me  a  mightier 
accession  than  a  Christianized  country,  in  respect  of  its  parishes. 
And  should  there  be  a  fountain,  out  of  which  there  emanated  a 
thousand  rills,  it  would  be  to  the  source  that  I  should  carry  the 
salt  of  purification,  and  not  to  any  of  the  streams  which  flow  from 
it."* 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE    PULPIT, 

The  Pulpit  no  bad  critPvion —■Divides  now  its  former  influence  Avith  the  Press — 
Can  never  be  superseded  —  Lines  of  Cowper  —  Extensively  employed  on  the 
side  of  evil  —  Deplorable  state  of  the  German  churches  —  Testimonies  of  Urs. 
"Wichern  and  Krummacher  — Dishonesty  of  the  rationalistic  preachers  — Fault 
of  the  consistories  —  Evil  of  uniting-  churches  on  a  loose  doctrinal  basis  — 
Eationalism  in  the  Protestant  pulpits  of  Huntjary  —  National  church  of  Geneva 
—  State  of  the  Reformed  Churcii  of  Holland  — A  glance  at  Belgium —  Pulpit 
agency  in  France —  Ministering  to  old  superstitious  or  to  infidelity  —  The  .\bbe 
Lacordaire  —  Piationalism  in  the  French  Protestant  church  —  Causes  of  this  — 
Stnte  of  the  British  Pulpit  — IMiicb  that  is  cheering —  Ruiiiousinfluence  of  mere 
moral  preaching  in  the  Establishment  — Tractariauism  the  growing  evil— Con- 
cluding remark. 

The  state  of  the  pnlpit  among  any  people  is,  generally,  no  bad 
criterion  of  the  state  of  religion'^itself     It  does  not  indeed  indicate, 

*  Hanna's  Life  of  Chalmers,  vol.  ii.  p.  376. 


THE    PULPIT.  301 

as  infallibly  as  the  thermometer,  or  the  water-mark,  the  teni- 
jieratiire  of  the  siirroiindiiig  atmosphere,  or  the  height  to  which 
the  river  of  the  water  of  life  has  risen.  In  some  places  there  may- 
be much  light  and  heat  in  the  pulpit,  while  the  people  to  a  con- 
siderable extent  may  be  frigid  and  sitting  in  darkness.  In  other 
places,  on  the  contrary,  there  may  be  much  more  vital  godliness 
among  the  peojjle  than  among  tlieir  teachers ;  just  as  the  lowlands 
may  be  bathed  in  sun-ligl)t  while  the  uplands  are  shrouded  in 
mists.  But  these  cases  are  like  exceptions  to  a  general  rule.  It 
commonly  happens  that  where  a  pulj)it  agency  exists  in  any  con- 
siderable extent,  as  in  European  countries,  it  exerts  no  little  in- 
fluence on  the  faith  and  morals  of  the  population.  The  continual 
droppings  from  this  quarter  make  an  impression,  for  good  or  evil, 
on  the  hearts  of  the  millions  that  come  under  them. 

The  pulpit,  at  one  time,  was  almost  the  only  means  of  imparting 
instruction  to  the  people.  Books  existed  only  in  manuscript,  and 
these  were  scarcely  kuown  beyond  the  walls  of  monasteries  and 
the  libraries  of  the  learned.  i)own  to  the  end  of  the  middle  ages, 
the  oral  teacher  had  nothing  deserving  the  name  of  a  competitor. 
During  much  of  thut  period,  however,  the  power  of  the  pulpit  was 
in  a  great  measure  dormant,  owing  to  the  coiTuption  of  the  church 
and  the  indolence  of  the  clergy.  At  the  lieformation  it  awoke ; 
and,  like  the  blast  of  a  trumpet,  startled  the  nations.  And  from 
that  time  onward  to  the  present,  the  pulpit,  as  in^  the  early  ages  of 
the  Christian  church,  has  wielded  an  extensive  influence  over  the 
minds  of  men.  Ever  since  the  invention  of  printing,  it  has  ])ad 
a  rival  in  the  press.  The  rivalry  in  a  great  measure  and  for  long, 
has  been  a  salutary  one.  Both  agencies  have  done  mighty  service 
to  the  world, in  disseminating  that  truth  v»lierewith  men  are  made 
free.  The  press,  within  a  few  years,  owing  to  the  removal  of 
restrictions  that  crippled  its  energies,  has  made  rapid  strides,  and 
is,  at  the  present  moment,  perhaps,  the  most  powerful  agent  for 
good  or  evil  that  is  brought  to  bear  on  the  minds  of  men.  The 
pulpit,  it  cannot  be  denied,  has  lost  something  of  its  influence.  At 
least  as  an  agent  in  moulding  and  controlling  the  minds  of  the 
people,  it  nuist  divide,  with  the  advancing  press,  the  influence 
which  it  once  exerted  alone. 

But  the  pid])it  can  never  be  superseded.  It  is  pjre  eminently 
heaven's  instrumentality  in  operating  on  men's  minds  and  hearts, 
"  It  hath  pleased  God  by  the  foolishness  of  preaching,"  or  by  what 
worldly  men  count  foolishness,  "  to  save  them  that  believe."  Eeli- 
gious  truth  has  hitherto  been  propagated  ma'i;ly  by  a  pulpit 
agency,  and  so  will  it  continue  to  be.  By  this  the  battles  of  the 
Lord  must  be  fought,  darkness  and  error  driven  back,  and  the 
"kingdom  not  of  this  world"  extended.  Men,  in  general,  are 
iriach  more  influenced  by  what  they  hear  than  by  what  they  read. 
The  living  voice  of  the  preacher  is  better  fitted  to  excite  attention 


302  THE    PULPJT. 

to  divine  things,  to  awaken  an  interest  in  them,  and  to  impress 
them  on  the  mind,  than  the  press. 


"  the  pulpit  (in  the  sober  use 


Of  its  legitimate,  peculiar  powers) 
Must  stand  acknowledged,  while  the  world  shall  stand, 
The  most  important  and  efiFectual  guard, 
Support,  and  ornament  of  virtue's  cause. 
There  stands  the  messenger  of  truth  :  there  stands 
The  legate  of  the  skies  !  —  His  theme  divine, 
Bis  office  sacred,  his  ci-edentials  clear. 
By  hun  the  violated  law  speaks  out 
Its  thunders ;  and  by  him,  in  strains  as  sweet 
As  angels  use,  the  gospel  whispers  peace. 
He  stablishes  the  strong,  restores  the  weak, 
Eeclaims  the  wanderer,  binds  the  broken  heart, 
And,  arm'd  himself  in  panoply  complete 
*  Of  heavenly  temper,  furnishes  with  arms 

Bright  as  his  own,  and  trains,  by  every  rule 

Of  holy  discipline,  to  glorious  war, 

The  sacramental  host  of  God's  elect ! 

Are  all  such  teachers  ?  —  would  to  heaven  all  were !  "  * 

The  poet  drew  from  life.  It  was  no  mere  fanciful  sketch — a 
thing  to  be  desired,  but  seldom  or  never  realized.  Many  a  hamlet 
and  town  throughout  our  country  and  other  lands,  can  tell  of  such 
a  "  messenger  of  truth,"  such  a  "  legate  of  the  skies."  But  all 
are  not  "  such  teachers."  "  Would  to  heaven  all  were ! " — How 
very  different  would  be  the  state  of  the  church  and  the  world ! 

The  pulpit,  notwithstanding  its  high  sacredness,  is  extensively 
employed,  in  many  lands,  on  the  side  of  evil.  All  the  forms  of 
infidelity,  from  the  grossest  pantheism  to  the  most  lifeless  for- 
malism, have  their  abettors  in  the  pulpit.  The  unbelief  of  the 
schools  works  chiefly,  by  this  agency,  on  the  minds  of  the  people. 
If  the  seats  of  learning,  where  the  future  ministers  of  the  church 
are  reared,  be  occupied  by  infidel  teachers,  it  will  generally  hap- 
pen that  the  pulpits  are  much  on  the  side  of  infidelity.  Conti- 
nental Europe,  during  the  last  half  century  and  more,  affords  sad 
evidence  of  the  truth  of  this.  And  notwithstanding  so  much  of 
the  pulpit  power  in  our  own  land  is  on  the  side  of  scriptm-al  truth, 
we  see  that  it  is  also  much  exerted  on  behalf  of  pernicious  error. 

Look  at  Germany.  There  the  power  of  the  i3ulpit  is  seen  to- 
preponderate  mightily  on  the  side  of  infidelity.  Nothing  can  be 
more  deplorable  than  the  state  of  the  German  churches.  Ea- 
tionalism  of  every  shape  sits  enthroned  in  the  holy  place.  It  is, 
or  has  been,  deeply  rooted  in  the  universities,  in  the  lower  schools, 
and  in  the  pulpits.  Saxony,  the  cradle  of  the  Eeformation,  and 
the  country  of  Luther,  has  been  its  stronghold.  Most  of  the  old 
pastors  have  sat  at  the  feet  of  the  rationalist  chief  Wegscheider, 
and  are  faithful  to  his  principles ;  while  multitudes  of  the  younger, 
who  have  not  come  under  the  benign  influence  of  such  men  as 
Thoiuck  and  Midler,  belong  to  the  extreme  left  of  the  Hegehan 

♦  Cowper's  Task. 


THE    PULPIT.  303 

scliool,  and  acknowledge  as  their  guides,  Strauss,  Bruno  Bauer, 
and  such  like.  The  light  shines  araid  the  darkness,  but  it  is  hated. 
A  fervid  evangelism  is  to  be  found  bearing  witness  against  the  low- 
rationalism  that  has  usurped  its  place.  But  pietism  bears  the 
obloquy  that  once  belonged,  in  our  own  couTitry,  to  Puritanism 
and  Methodism.  The  German  churches,  with  some  illustrious 
exceptions,  present,  on  a  large  scale,  the  spectacle  of  men  shel- 
tered under  an  evangelical  creed,  but  throwing  out  doctrines  tliat 
give  the  lie  to  it;  men  holding  the  Bible  in  their  hand  as  their 
text-book,  who  exalt  their  fallible  reason  above  its  true  sayings; 
men  who  rob  Christ  of  his  glory  and  liis  word  of  its  supreme 
authority;  men  wh.o  eat  the  church's  bread,  and  lift  up  the  heel 
against  her.  By  such  a  pulpit  agency  as  this,  exeited  on  the  side 
to  which  lean  the  depiaved  tendencies  of  human  nature,  a  pan- 
theistic and  rationalistic  creed  has  made  wide  conquests  over  a 
Scriptural  Christianity,  among  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands 
of  all  classes  in  Germany. 

It  was  stated,  a  very  few  years  ago,  that  at  Dresden,  in  the 
chapel  of  whose  castle  the  great  reformer  ])reached  the  doctrines 
of  salvation,  only  one  of  the  many  Lutheran  pulpits  soiJfeded 
forth  the  gospel  of  grace.  In  such  parts  as  Baden,  Rhenish  Ba- 
varia, and  Hesse  Darmstadt,  the  rationalistic  ministers  were  said 
to  preponderate  over  the  evangelical  in  the  proportion  of  ten  to 
one.-i'  The  adage,  like  priest,  like  peo])le,  is  in  such  places  strongly 
exemplified  Their  religious  princijiles  have  long  been  under- 
mined by  a  systematic  course  of  rationalistic  preaching  from  the 
pulpit.  Infidelity  and  inditierentism,  especially  in  large  towns, 
characterize  to  a  learful  extent  all  classes  from  the  highest  to  the 
lowest.  Dr.  Krummacher  stated,  very  lately,  that  in  Berlin,  which 
contains  more  than  400,000  persons,  not  more  than  one  twentieth 
visit  the  house  of  God.  The  remainder,  to  all  appearance,  being 
the  disciples  of  a  vulgar  rationalism.  Thei-e  are  other  parts,  it  is 
true,  such  as  Wurtembui'g.  Old  Bavaria,  Westphalia,  and  Pome- 
rania,  where  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation  have  some  hold  of 
the  minds  of  the  people,  and  where  believing  preachers  are  to  be 
found.  Dr.  Wichern,  who  is  full  of  hope  in  reference  to  Ger- 
many, tells  of  a  large  province  containing  three  bundled  clergy- 
men, in  which  evangelical  doctrine  was  not  ])reached  twenty-five 
years  ago  by  more  tlian  one  or  two  of  them,  but  where  now  two 
hundred  believing,  faithful  men  are  holding  ibrth  the  word  of  life. 
But,  after  reckoning  up  all  that  can  be  claimed  for  the  pure  Gos- 
pel, a  vast  prepojiderance  of  discipleship  and  pulpit  agency  in  the 
German  fatherland  is  on  the  side  that  is  adverse  to  Scripture 
Christianity.  "  In  short,  a  popular  philosophic  inundation  of  the 
most  shallow  kind,  which  bears  nothing  of  true  Christianity  but 

♦  Evangelical  Christeuclora,  Dec.  1S19. 


o04  THE    PULriT. 

the  assumed  name,  covers  up  to  tliis  day  an  immeasurable  extent 
of  the  ground  of  the  German  church."  =:• 

No  more  disastrous  influence  can  come  upon  a  church,  and, 
through  the  church,  upon  a  country,  than  to  admit  unconverted 
and  unbeUeving  men  into  her  pulpits.  It  is  like  allowing  traitors 
to  enter  the  army,  thieves  to  preside  at  the  treasury,  and  states- 
men, who  are  bribed  by  foreign  gold,  to  guide  the  destinies  of  a 
nation.  The  pitiful  meanness  and  base  hypocrisy  of  tlie  men 
•who  cling  to  the  emoluments  of  a  church,  while  their  principles 
are  glaringly  opposed  to  its  creed  and  destructive  of  its  influence, 
cannot  be  too  severely  reprobated.  How  would  it  have  incurred 
the  woful  denunciations  of  Him  wlio,  though  meek  and  lowly, 
frowned  upon  the  false  and  deluding  guides  of  the  people.  Strauss, 
at  the  end  of  his  Lehen  Jesu,  after  having  reduced  Christianity  to 
a  system  of  myths,  and  thereby  destroyed  its  historical  validity, 
claims  for  himself,  and  those  who  think  with  him,  the  right  of 
ministering  at  the  altar,  and  preaching  the  Gospel,  that  is,  the 
right  of  being  a  Christian  and  an  infidel  at  the  same  time.  The 
dishonesty  witli  w^iich  he  handles  the  evangelical  histories,  for- 
bids us  to  expect  over  strict  morality  in  discussing  such  questions. 
May  not  the  language  which  the  God  of  truth  addresses  to  certain 
other  personages,  be  addressed  to  such  aspirants  after  two  incom- 
patible characters.  "  What  hast  thou  to  do  to  declare  my  statutes, 
or  that  thou  shouldest  take  my  covenant  in  thy  mouth?  Seeing 
thou  hatest  instruction,  and  castest  my  words  behind  thee."f 

But  our  condemnation  must  be  pronounced,  also,  on  the  autho- 
rities with  whom  lies  the  responsibility  of  admitting  infidel  teachers 
into  the  pulpits  of  the  church.  The  Protestant  church  in  Ger- 
many, as  is  well  known,  is  governed  by  consistories  which  are 
composed  partly  of  ecclesiastical  and  partly  of  lay  members.  With 
them,  generally,  rests  the  power  of  deciding  on  the  election  of 
pastors,  subject  indeed  to  the  sanction  of  the  supreme  civil  power. 
In  some  parts,  as  in  Prussia  and  Bavaria,  these  bodies  are  for  the 
most  part  composed  of  men  of  evangelical  principles;  but  their 

*  The  Religious  Condition  of  Christendom  (18.52),  p.  42.3. 

+  Dr.  Beard  says:  "  Immediately  on  the  appearance,  in  June,  1835.  of  the  first 
part  of  his  "  Life  of  Jesus,"  Strauss  received  from  the  Wurtemberg  Council  of 
Education  a  formal  inquiry  whether  he  considered  a  position  in  an  institution, 
designed  to  prepare  young  men  for  the  Christian  ministry,  tenable  by  one  who 
had  put  forth  such  views  as  he  had  published  in  his  book.  In  answer,  Strauss 
endeavoured  to  show,  that  his  opinions  did  not  disqualify  him  for  holding  an 
office  in  the  Church,  since  the  clergyman  conceived  that  as  an  idea  which  the 
people  assumed  as  histoi-y,  and  that  the  two  must  be  brought  into  accordance." 
In  the  last  chapter  of  the  Lebm  Jr^su,  Strauss  presents  us  with  a  similar  piece  of 
precious  morality.  He  says  :  "  He  who  does  not  believe  the  Gospel  histoiy  may 
Btill  recognise  the  religious  influence,  as  well  as  he  who  receives  the  liistory;  it 
is  only  a  difference  of  form,  by  which  the  substance  remains  unaffected.  Where- 
fore it  is  discourieous  to  impute  a  lie  to  a  minister  who  preaches  on  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ;  and,  while  he  does  not  think  this  a  reality  as  an  individual, 
sensible  fact,  yet  holds  for  true  tlie  spectacle  of  the  liviug  process  of  the  spirit 
which  lies  therein."— i>r.  Beard's  "  Strauss,  Heijel,  and  their  Opinions,"  pp.  16,  23. 


THE   PULriT,  305 

influence  is  not  imfrequently  counteracted  by  the  dominant  un- 
godliness of  the  people,  and  the  indifterentisni  of  the  members  of 
the  government.  In  other  places  again,  as  in  the  Palatinate,  those 
who  have  the  administration  of  church  affairs,  instead  of  endea- 
vouring to  check  the  current  of  irreligion,  would  let  it  flow  and 
float  on  the  bosom  of  it.  While  in  other  parts,  among  which  are 
especially  signified  the  smaller  Saxon  Principalities,  the  consis- 
tories are,  without  any  other  spot  or  wrinkle,  grossly  rationalistic 
in  their  character.-;^ 

It  deserves  notice,  also,  as  bearing  upon,  and  in  some  measure 
accounting  for  the  infidelity  of  the  pulpits,  that  in  Germany  there 
has  been  cherished,  on  the  part  of  the  church  rulers  at  least,  a  strong 
desire  of  mere  external  unity.  The  late  king  of  Prussia  aimed  at 
imiting  all  the  Protestant  churches.  The  Augsburg  and  the 
Genevan  confessions  were  amalgamated,  about  thirty  years  ago, 
in  Prussia,  in  Rhenish  Bavaria,  and  in  otlier  parts  of  the  land; 
and  out  of  the  amalgamation,  arose  the  United,  or,  as  it  is  not  very 
correctly  called,  the  Evangelical  church.  But  the  doctrinal  basis, 
mider  this  state  dictatorship,  was  very  loosely  defined;  and  hence, 
anfiid  an  external  uuitbrmity,  exists  much  doctrinal  dissension. 
The  coat  is  one,  but  it  is  made  of  many  colours.  The  right 
of  private  judgment  in  interpreting  the  Lutheran  symbols,  has 
been  tolerated  so  far  as  to  let  men  of  the  lowest  rationalistic 
views  as  well  as  the  most  orthodox  dwell  under  the  shadow  of  the 
same  church.  A  loose  rule  of  faith,  a  wavering  doctrinal  standard, 
and  a  latitudinarian  interpretation,  have  thus  opened  a  door  for 
the  admission  of  pastors  and  teachers  whose  influence  is  exerted 
against  Scriptural  Christianity.  Be  the  governors  of  the  church, 
civil  or  ecclesiastical,  or  both ;  be  they  independent  of  the  state  or 
connected  with  it,  great  responsibility  lies  upon  them  in  admitting 
directly  or  indirectly,  tmconverted  and  infidel  men  into  the  pulpit 
from  which  should  sound  forth  the  Gospel  of  the  grace  of  God. 
And  this  shows  the  importance  of  no  man.  or  body  of  men,  having 
anything  to  do  with  the  government  of  Christ's  house,  but  those 
who  are  true  members  of  the  household  of  faith.f 

*  Evangelical  Chnsfenclom,  vol.  iii.  p.  362. 

+  Dr  Robinson,  speaking  of  the  examinations  to  wLich  candidates  for  the 
pastoral  office  in  Germany  are  subjected— examinations  which  in  point  of  scholar- 
ship are  very  testing,  says  :  "  In  these  examinations,  rigorous  and  decisive  as  they 
are,  there  is  one  omission  which  strikes  our  feelings  with  surprise  and  grief. 
By  this  door  enter  all  the  pastors  and  teachers  of  tlie  church  ;  of  tliat  church,  the 
object  of  which  is  to  keep  alive  the  pure  and  holy  flame  of  the  Christian  religion, 
and  to  extend  the  boundaries  of  Gods  kingdom  upon  earth.  But  to  those  thus 
entering  the  question  is  never  put,  whether  they  have  any  regard  for  this  kingdom 
of  God.— The  church,  alas!  is  no  longer  at  her  own  disposal, and  cannot  prove  'the 
spirits  of  her  prophets  whether  thpy  be  of  God."  She  is  but  the  slave  of  civil 
power ;  and  all  tliat  she  is  at  liberty  to  ask  or  know  is,  whether  her  prophets 
are  regularly  appointed  by  the  king  and  his  ministers.  Not  one  question  is  ever 
asked  as  to  their  belief  in  a  revelation,  nor  as  to  their  personal  motives  in  thus 
undertaking  to  be  the  ambassadors  of  God  to  man.    When  the  shepherds  are  thua 

X 


306  THE    PULPIT. 

We  speak  not  of  Popisli  Austria,  whose  pulpit  agency,  like  that 
of  all  countries  enslaved  by  Rome,  is  on  the  side  of  tlie  corruptions 
of  Christianity,  and  thus  hostile  to  the  pure  gospel  of  Christ.  But 
we  advert  to  Hungary,  that  interesting  land  under  Austrian  rule, 
whose  political  struggles  and  religious  condition  have,  of  late  years, 
drawn  forth  the  sympathies  of  the  lovers  of  civil  and  religious 
freedom.  The  Hungarian  Protestant  church  flourished  both  in 
numerical  and  spiritual  vigour  for  some  time  after  the  Eeformation, 
and  her  pulpit  agency  was  a  blessing  to  the  country.  But  the 
persecutions  of  last  century,  and  the  rationalism  of  later  times, 
have  corrupted  her  principles  and  prostrated  her  strength.  This 
Protestant  church  reckons  up  about  four  millions  of  members  at  the 
present  day.  Almost  all  their  ministers,  however,  are  rationalists, 
having  been  educated  in  rationalistic  academies,  not  in  Hungary, 
but  in  otlier  parts  of  the  Continent.  The  consequence  of  infidelity 
and  lukewarmness  among  the  ministers,  has  been  infidelity  and  a 
wide-spreading  degeneracy  among  the  flocks.  The  pulpit  agency 
which  was  once  on  the  side  of  the  pure  Christian  faith,  has  been 
largely  employed  on  the  side  of  unbelief  A  few  faithful  men  in 
Hungary  are  endeavoimng  to  build  up  the  walls  of  their  Jerusalem, 
and  bring  the  church  back  to  her  first  love.  Cluistiaa  education 
is  occupying  their  attention.  They  are  aiming  at  undoing  the 
evils  of  neological  training  received  from  abroad,  by  establishing 
a  sound  theological  faculty  among  themselves.  And  from  this 
evangelical  school,  in  the  establishment  and  support  of  which  they 
need  Christian  help,  they  design  to  supply  faithful  ministers  to  the 
Protestant  church  of  Hungary  and  Austria. - 

There  are  other  parts  of  the  Continent  where  the  agency  of  the 
pulpit  is  not  less  strongly  exerted  on  the  side  of  infidelity,  and 
where  the  powers  that  be  give  that  evil  agency  their  support. 
Look,  for  example,  at  Switzerland.  In  Geneva,  not  to  mention 
other  parts  where  socinianism  and  neolog-^raiism  have  extensively 
prevailed,  a  rationalistic  unitarianism,  for  nearly  a  century,  has 
had  possession  of  the  national  pulpits.  It  is  well  known  that  the 
gi-eat  chiefs  of  the  French  infidelity  hailed  the  Genevese  pastors 
as  allies  in  the  work  of  demolishing  every  thing  peculiarly  Christian. 
D'Alembert,  in  the  article  Geneva,  in  the  French  Encyclopedic, 
says,  "  All  tlie  religion  that  many  of  the  ministers  of  Geneva  have 
is  a  complete  socinianism,  rejecting  everything  called  mystery,  and 
supposing  that  the  first  principle  of  a  true  religion  is  to  propose 
nothing  to  be  received  as  a  matter  of  faith  which  strikes  against 

cLoseu  without  any  reference  to  their  fidelity,  are  we  to  wonder  that  the  flock 
should  go  astray  and  become  widely  scattered?" — Robinson's  Concise  View  of  tlie 
German  Universities,  <^-c.  p.  97. 

The  above,  written  about  twenty  years  ago,  if  not  an  exact  description  of  mat- 
ters still,  shows,  at  least,  on  what  side  the  pulpit  agency  of  Germany  has  for  long 
been  exerted. 

*  See  Evang.  Christendom,  vol.  iv.  p.  334,  and  vol.  v.  p.  179. 


THE    PULPIT.  SOT 

reason."^^  And  it  was  significant  of  the  leanings  of  the  pastors 
that  some  of  the  most  iiitellectual  among  them  were  a(lmirij:ig 
visitors  of  Voltaire  during  liis  residence  at  Ferney.  The  departure 
of  the  Genevese  church  from  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  and 
the  occupancy  of  her  pulpits  bysocinian  and  deistical  teachers,  are 
considered  to  have  had  no  small  share  in  bringing  in  that  flood  of 
ungodUness  and  immorality  vvhich,  as  in  the  case  of  France,  at 
last  deluged  the  country. 

Previous  to  the  Revolution  of  1846.  which  deprived  the  church 
of  her  constitution,  as  she  l)ad  formerly  been  deprived  of  her 
evangelical  doctrine,  tlie  right  of  nomination  to  all  the  eccle- 
Biastical  vacancies  in  the  canton,  resided  with  the  "  Company  of 
Pastors."  And  it  is  an  indisputable  fact  that  tliey  chose  men  of 
rationalistic  principles.  ]\Jalan.  Gaussen,  DAubigne,  and  others 
of  that  noble  band,  who,  on  being  awakened  themselves,  sum- 
moned the  Genevese  to  the  faith  and  hope  of  the  Gospel,  were 
censured  and  severely  treated  for  so  doing  by  the  company  referred 
to.  Cheever,  in  his  deliirhtful  "  Wandeiings,"  tells  us  ti)at  Gaus- 
sen mentioned,  what  to  him  was  a  startling  fact,  that  out  of  foity 
pastors  in  the  national  chui'ch,  only  tln^ee  were  regarded  as  evan- 
geHcal.  By  the  new  constitution  given  to  Geneva,  in  May,  1847, 
an  infidel  radicalism  has  stretched  its  hand  over  the  church.  All 
opinions  are  tolerated  witliin  her  pale,  and  may  have  tlieir  repre- 
sentatives in  her  pulpits;  and  thougli,  through  this  opened  door, 
evangelical  doctrines  may  enter,  as  well  as  the  most  rationalistic, 
yet  the  license  must  be  more  favourable  to  the  latter  tlmn  to  the 
former.  Every  Protestant  citizen  who  has  reached  the  age  of 
twenty-one,  be  he  Cln-istian  or  infidel,  is  by  law  a  member  of  the 
church,  and  has  a  right  to  all  her  privileges.  The  pulpit  and  the 
pew,  in  the  hands  of  an  infidel  government,  to  which  the  church 
is  subjected,  are  thus  made  agents  in  strengthening  and  propa- 
gating socinian  and  rationalistic  principles.  "  Calvin's  vessel," 
remarks  D'Aubigne,  "  which  for  a  century  past  lay  half-sunken  in 
the  waters,  has  now  suddenly  been  enguli)hed." 

If  we  cast  oiu-  eye  upon  HoJIaitch  we  see  that  rationalism,  as  in 
the  Protestant  churches  of  Germany,  there  wields,  in  a  great  mea- 
sure, the  pulpit  agency  of  the  Reformed  Chuvch.  Those  doctrines 
which  form  the  very  marrow  of  the  Christian  creed,  such  as  the 
trinity,  the  true  and  proper  divinity  of  Chiist,  and  his  atonement 
for  human  salvation,  are  very  generally  repudiated  by  tlie  teachers 
of  the  people.  The  infidelity  of  the  schools  is  boldly  enunciated 
fi'om  the  pulpit.  A  pure  fervid  evangelism,  as  held  forth  by  the 
faithful  in  the  land,  is  frowned  u])on  by  those  who  have  been  or- 
dained to  preach  it.  The  laity  are  even  said  to  conti-ast  favonr- 
ahly  with  the  clergy:    the  departure  from  the  doctrines  of  the 

*  Dr.  Smith's  Scripture  Testimony,  vol.  i.  p.  I'Jl, 

X  2 


308  THE    PULPIT. 

EefonimtioD  "being  much  more  general  among,  the  latter  than 
among  the  former.  The  Dutch  people  have  still,  to  some  extent, 
a  love  for  the  doctrines  of  the  cross,  and  that  love  is  increasing 
both  among  the  higher  and  lower  classes  of  society.  Another 
favourable  sign  is  that  the  younger  ministers  who  are  commg 
forth  to  occupy  the  pulpits,  evince  in  a  great  measure,  an  attach- 
ment to  the  old  Gospel  truth.  But,  (as  one  who  knows  the  Ne- 
therlands, and  is  well  remembered  there,  has  said.)  the  gi-eat  body 
of  the  clergy  represented  by  the  National  Synod-seem  to  be  still 
decidedly  unfavourable  to  pure  evangelical  religion.^:- 

Belgium,  the  other  division  of  the  Netherlands,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  its  small  number  of  Protestant  evangelical  churches, 
and,  notwithstanding  its  free  constitution,  lies  under  the  blighting 
influence  of  Popery.  The  pulpit  agency,  as  in  Italy  and  Spain, 
in  so  far  as  it  is  employed,  advocates  man's  rehgion,  not  God's. 
It  is  on  the  side  of  superstition  and  materialism,  and  adverse  to 
spiritual  Christianity.  There  are  good  grounds  for  believin'g  that 
not  a  few  of  the  priests,  disgusted  with  the  Eomish  system,  have 
become  deists  or  infidels,  but  cling  to  the  priest's  office  for  the 
sake  of  bread.  "  One  may  attend  whole  years  on  the  prayers  and 
semions  without  ever  hearing  it  proclaimed,  '  that  whoso  believeth 
on  the  Son  hath  eternal  life;'  or  having  those  words  of  the  apostle 
repeated  and  developed,  '  for  by  grace  are  ye  saved  through  faith  ; 
and  that  not  of  yourselves :  it  is  the  gift  of  God :  not  of  works, 
lest  any  man  should  boast,  for  we  are  his  workmanship,  created  in 
Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works.'  But  you  will  hear  sermons  enough 
on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  the  excellence  of  the  priesthood, 
the  mediation  of  the  Virgin,  the  intercession  of  saints,  purgatory, 
confession,  works  of  satisfaction,  and  indulgences,"!  all  of  which 
are  destructive  of  the  authority  of  God's  word  and  of  the  per- 
fection of  Christ's  work. 

If  we  turn  to  France,  we  see  that,  with  a  few  brilhant  excep- 
tions, all  the  existing  pulpit  agency  is  on  the  side  of  materiahsm, 
or  rationalism,  or  a  gi'ossly  corrupted  Christianity.  France,  like 
every  other  Eoman  Catholic  country,  swanns  with  priests.  Be- 
sides the  higher  classes  of  ecclesiastics,  wdm  amount  to  three  or 
four  thousand,  there  are  more  than  thirty  thousand  curates  scat- 
tered throughout  the  country.  But  it  is  not  so  much  by  the  pulpit, 
as  by  imposing  rites  and  ceremonies,  that  Popery  influences  the 
minds  of  the  people.  The  Roman  Catholic  church,  in  France, 
has  had  her  pulpit  orators,  men  whose  names  shone  like  stars  in 
the  seventeenth  century;  and,  thouo^h  her  glory  in  this  respect  has 
departed  with  the  Bossuets  and  Massillons,  she  is  not  without 
celebrated  preachers  still.     But  as  a  church,  the  pulpit  is  by  no 

The  Religious  Condition  of  Christendom,  p.  409 ;  and  Evangelical  Christen- 
dom, vol.  vii  p.  47. 
+  The  Religious  Condition  of  Christendom,  p.  347. 


THE    PULPIT.  309 

meaii£  the  seat  of  her  power.  The  loerformance  of  the  mass,  the 
pomp  and  pageantry  of  her  ceremonies,  the  readiness  with  which 
she  grants  absolution  from  sin,  and  such  like,  exert  the  influence, 
and  more  than  the  influence,  which  belongs  to  the  pulpit  in  Pro- 
testant countries.  It  is  well  known  that  the  church  of  France, 
previous  to  the  great  revolution,  was  filled  with  men  of  seci-et  or 
avowed  infidel  principles.  That  church,  as  we  have  seen,  left  the 
peo])le  in  de])lorable  ignorance;  and  must  bear  a  considerable  por- 
tion of  the  guilt  of  those  terrible  excesses  which  stained  the  revo- 
lution. At  the  present  day,  her  clergy,  while  wondrously  apt  and 
vigorous  in  accommodating  themselves  to  eveiy  turn  of  the  poli- 
tical wheel, — now  blessing,  in  the  presence  of  the  people,  trees  of 
liberty,  and  preaching  up  equality  and  fraternity,  and  anon  in- 
triguing with  others  to  promote  a  reaction  in  favour  of  despotism, 
— are  doing  nothing  to  put  France  in  possession  of  faith  in  God. 
They  are  yielding  rather  to  the  infidel  spirit  tliat  pervades  all 
ranks;  or,  at  best,  having  recourse  to  their  old  superstitious  and 
frauds;  and,  both  by  their  poHtical  intrigues  and  religious  impos- 
tures, are  calling  forth  the  demon  that  would  destroy  every  tiling 
that  bears  the  Christian  name.  The  Abbe  Lacordaire,  who  is  at 
present  perhaps  the  most  popular  and  influential  preacher  in 
France,  has  been  wielding  his  pulpit  power  over  the  thousands 
that  crowd  the  old  cathedral  of  Notre  Dame,  not  on  the  side  of 
Scriptural  Christianity,  but  on  the  side  of  its  corruptions  _He 
has,  since  the  last  revolution,  and  until  lately,  been  declaiming 
rather  on  political  and  social  questions,  than  exhibiting  and  en- 
forcing religious  truth  ;  flattering  the  national  vanity  of  the  people 
by  telling  them  that  they  are  beloved  of  God,  and  will  have  the 
first  rank  in  heaven,  instead  of  begetting  in  them  humility,  re- 
pentance toward  God,  and  faith  toward  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In 
so  far,  then,  as  the  pulpit  of  the  Boman  Catholic  church  in  France 
is  concerned,  we  have  an  agency  that,  upon  the  wdiole,  is  power- 
less for  good,  and  which  is  exerting  whatever  influence  it  pos- 
sesses, either  directly  or  indirectly,  against  spiritual  Christiauiiy. 
One  red  republican,  pointing  to  the  Bible,  which  he  had  been  in- 
duced to  read,  said  to  another  revolutionist  that  had  come,  to  dis- 
cuss other  matters,  "  Robert,  Robert,  not  till  that  book  fills  the 
empty  throne  of  France  can  France  be  happy, "=:=  Rather,  would 
v*^e  say,  not  till  the  pure  Gospel  be  enthroned  in  her  many  pulpits, 
and  she  possess  an  extensive  thoroughly  Christian  pulpit  agency, 
can  she  cease  to  resemble  the  troubled  sea  which  cannot  rest. 

If  from,  the  Roman  Catholic  we  turn  to  the  Protestant  reformed 
church  in  France,  matters,  considering  what  we  expect  from 
protestantism,  are  far  fi'om  cheering.  French  protestantism,  which 
owed  its  organization  to  the  great  Calvin,  flourished  vigorously 

*  Evangelical  Christeuilovn,  ISIarch  1851 


3J0  THE    PULriT. 

foi  a  lengthened  period,  and  exerted  a  happy  influence  on  the 
coantry.  It  has  been  calculated  that,  at  one  lime,  there  were  in 
France  ahontfive  millions  of  Cidvinists.  forming  between  two  and 
three  thousand  churches,  and  that  from  their  ]mlpits  sounded  forth 
that  Gospel  which  multitudes  from  all  lands  flocked  to  hear  from 
the  reformer's  lips.  The  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes  gave  a 
fatal  blow  to  the  protestant  chuiches.  dissolved  their  organization, 
and  dispersed  the  faithful.  The  blood  of  the  Huguenots  is  still 
upon  France  and  upon  her  children.  Religious  liberty,  a  thing- 
long  unknown,  was  in  some  measure  established  under  the  con- 
Bulate  of  Napoleon,  but  the  Protestants  were  not  free  to  assemble 
as  an  ecclesiastical  body.  This  right  they  enjoyed,  amid  the  dissolu- 
tion of  the  social  frame-work  that  happened  at  the  February  revolu- 
tion. And  the  assembly  of  the  Protestant  delegates  held  in  Paris 
a  few  years  ago,  indicated,  in  some  measure,  the  kind  of  influence 
exerted  by  the  pulpit  of  the  French  Protestant  chm'ch.  That 
there  are  men  ot  evangelical  views,  of  devoted  piety  and  of  pulpit 
power,  among  her  teachers,  besides  the  noble  few  who  have  seceded 
and  formed  an  independent  church  on  the  true  principle  of  indi- 
vidnal  profession,  we  gladly  acknowledge,  but  they  are  decidedly  in 
a  minority.  And  what  is  to  be  thought  of  a  church  which,  not 
having  met  in  an  assembly  for  a  very  long  period,  shrinks,  when  it 
does  meet,  from  adverting  to  the  state  of  its  doctrines,  and  rejects, 
almost  unanimously,  a  proposal  to  place  a  confession  of  positive 
faith  at  the  base  of  its  organization?  The  latitudinarian  and  the 
orthodox  repose  under  the  same  shadow,  and,  for  the  sake  of  pre- 
serving an  external  uniformity,  the  utmost  license  in  interpreting 
Bible  and  symbol  is  conceded.  This  system,  so  widely  prevalent 
on  the  Continent,  is  well  calculated  to  rationalize  a  church,  and  to 
admit  men  of  pantheistical  or  ueological  views  into  her  pulpits. 
The  majority  of  the  Paris  synod  were  unquestionably  rationalistic 
in  their  leanings,  men  adverse  or  indifferent  to  those  great  doctrines 
which  constitute  the  glory  of  the  Pteformation.  The  pulpit  agency 
of  the  French  Protestant  church  must,  therefore,  to  a  large  extent, 
be  coinited  among  the  agencies  that  are  against  Scriptural 
Christianity. 

Various  influences  have  contributed  to  produce  this  result. 
The  sceptical  philosophy  of  last  century  infected  the  minds  of 
many  of  the  pastors.  It  entered  into  the  sacred  place  as  well  as 
ran  riot  in  the  outer  courts.  Numbers  of  the  sworn  servants  of 
Christ  yielded  to  the  deadly  power  of  the  reign  of  materialism.  In 
addition  to  this,  the  rationalistic  socinianism  of  Geneva  came  over 
nnd  gradually  took  possession  of  almost  all  the  protestant  pulpits. 
It  is  from  the  low  Socinian  Academy  of  Geneva  that  the  greater 
number  of  the  preachers  that  minister  in  the  French  church, 
have  been  obtained.  Here,  then,  in  the  church  of  Farel  and 
Calvin  and  Beza — a  church  which  should  prove  a  check  to  the 


TUE    PULPIT.  311 

superstitions  of  Romanism  on  the  one  hand,  and  to  the  doctrines 
of  an  infidel  socialism  on  the  other  —  we  have  the  greater  portion 
of  the  pulpit  agency  on  the  wrong  side.  Over  against  that,  we  see 
the  few  good  men  within  her  pale,  and  that  little  but  increasing 
band  who  bid  fair  to  do  valiantly  without — taking,  as  they  do, 
for  their  motto,  "  No  in-difFerentism,  no  exclusiveness."  And  while 
we  beseech  God  to  send  prosperity  both  to  the  one  and  the  other, 
the  thought  is  depressing  that  the  pulpit  of  such  a  church  should, 
for  the  most  part,  be  of  a  character  much  more  gratiljing  to  the 
infidel  than  to  the  Christian. 

If  from  this  rapid  glance  at  the  state  of  the  pulpit  on  the  Conti- 
nent, we  fix  our  attention  on  our  ow?i  country,  we  witness  much 
more  that  is  cheering;  but  here  also  the  pulpit,  to  some  extent,  is 
made  an  agent  of  evil.  The  Gospel  is  the  glory  and  defence  of  ovn* 
beloved  land,  and  to  its  influence,  more  than  to  anything  else,  we 
owe  the  high  position  that  our  sea-girt  isle  occupies  among  the 
nations,  and  the  stability  of  our  social  fabric  amid  the  shakings  of 
principalities  and  powers.  England  and  Scotland  are  indebted  to 
the  treasure  which  the  Reformation  gave,  or  rather  restored  to 
them,  for  their  intellectual,  moral,  social,  and  physical  prosperity. 
In  both  parts  of  the  island,  we  exult  in  thinking  that  there  are 
thousands  of  pulpits,  both  in  the  established  and  dissenting 
churches,  sounding  forth  every  Sabbath,  to  millions  of  our  popu- 
lation, the  genuine  Gospel  of  the  Grace  of  God.  "We  regard  the 
evangelical  pulpit  of  Great  Britain,"  says  a  writer  whose  judgment 
in  such  matters  is  to  be  confided  in,=i=  "  with  all  its  faults,  as  pre- 
senting to  the  millions  of  our  people,  a  fuller  and  better  propor- 
tioned view  of  revealed  truth,  and  of  the  piety  which  that  truth 
should  produce,  than  has  been  exhibited  to  any  generation  since 
the  age  of  inspired  teachers."  But  while  this  is  gi-atefully  and 
joyfully  acknowledged,  it  must  not  blind  us  to  the  existence  of  a 
pulpit  agency  among  us  which  is  the  very  opposite  of  evangelical. 
We  refer  not  so  much  to  the  rationalistic  preachers  who  are  to  be 
found  here  and  there,  in  a  solitary  state,  in  our  large  towns,  and 
whose  influence  is  by  no  means  very  great,  as  to  the  tractarians 
who  fill,  in  considerable  numbers,  the  pulpits  of  the  Episcopal 
Church. 

It  is  to  the  praise  of  all  the  Evangelical  Nonconforming  churches 
on  both  sides  of  the  Tweed,  that  a  dcpartm-e  from  what  is  generally 
regarded  as  the  articulus  stands  vet  cadentis  ecdesice,  is  followed 
either  by  deposition  or  a  forfeittu'e  of  communion.  It  must  be 
admitted,  also,  that  the  Scottish  Establishment  is  generally  much 
more  careful  to  guard  against  the  admission  of  faithless  men  into 
her  pulpits,  than  the  Establishment  in  England.  The  time  was 
■when  moderatism  had  the  ascendency  in  the  church  of  Knox,  when 

*  Dr.  Vauglian. 


312  THE    PULPIT. 

all  that  is  peculiarly  evangelical  was  frowned  upon,  and  much  that 
is  opposed  to  evangelism  was  winked  at,  when  many  of  her  pulpits 
gave  forth  morality  for  the  Gospel,  and  doctrines  disparaging  to 
the  person  and  work  of  the  Redeemer.  But  that  time  happily  is 
gone ;  and  however  much  formalism  and  lifelessness  may  he  seen 
in  some  places,  it  cannot  be  said  that  in  the  establishment,  or  in 
the  several  vigorous  evangelical  nonconforming  churches  by  which 
she  is  surrounded,  there  is  anything  deserving  the  name  of  a  pul- 
pit agency  on  the  side  adverse  to  spiritual  Christianity. 

It  is  otherwise,  however,  in  the  Episcopal  Church  of  England. 
There,  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  are  a  number  of  choice  saintly 
men.  both  in  large  towns  and  rural  parishes,  upon  whom  the  mantle 
of  the  apostolic  band,  that  laboured  within  her  during  the  deadness 
of  last  century,  seems  to  have  fallen,  and  who  have  great  sorrow 
and  heaviness  of  heart  for  the  state  of  their  Zion.  It  is  unques- 
tionable that,  during  the  last  fifty  or  sixty  years,  the  evangelical 
leaven  has  made  much  progress  within  her  pale,  and  that  the 
number  of  her  earnest  believing  preachers  has  greatly  increased. 
But  these  are  just  like  scattered  lights  in  a  wide  extent  of  dark 
space.  It  is  no  slander,  but  the  very  truth,  when  it  is  asserted 
that  under  the  shadow  of  that  great  establishment  are  to  be  found 
multitudes  of  pastors  and  teachers  who  are  preaching.  Sabbath 
after  Sabbath,  another  gospel  than  the  gospel  of  Christ.  IMen  who 
know  not  the  truth,  and  care  not  a  fig  about  it.  readily  get  admis- 
sion into  ber  pulpits.  Personal  conversion  to  God  is  not  generally 
inquired  after,  as  an  indispensable  qualification  for  the  ministry. 
Such  a  qualification,  in  hundreds  of  cases,  would  be  stigmatised  as 
puritanism,  or  raethodism,  or  pietism.  A  formal  subscription  to 
the  thirty-nine  articles  is,  in  such  cases,  the  sure  passport  to  inves- 
titure with  the  sacred  office.  Thus  multitudes  of  men,  who  know 
not  the  way  of  salvation  themselves,  are  constituted  the  spiritual 
guides  of  others.  It  is  the  blind  leading  the  blind.  From  the 
ministrations  of  such  teachers,  we  could  glean  little  more  of  the 
gospel  of  Christ,  than  from  the  pages  of  Seneca  or  Epictetus.  A 
cold  prudential  morality  is  substituted  for  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus,  that  truth  in  the  belief  of  which  the  sinner  is  justified,  sanc- 
tified, and  saved.  This  is  an  agency  at  once  adverse  to  Scriptural 
Christianity  and  ruinous  to  men's  sords. 

But  this'^is  not  all.  Tractarianism  is  the  growing  evil.  It  may 
be  resolved,  as  we  have  said,  into  a  reaction  against  the  material- 
ism that  had  crept  over  the  church,  but  it  is  not  less  fatal  to  the 
spiritual  Christianity  of  the  New  Testament.  It  is  not  merely  the 
preaching  of  a  lifeless  morality  that  makes  the  pulpit  an  agency  in 
deluding  and  destroying  men,  but  the  inculcation  of  doctrines 
that  are  in  open  conflict  Avith  the  great  Scri})tural  principles  of  the 
Eefoimation.  Tbe  last  few  years  have  shown  a  wide-spread  defec- 
tion in  this  direction  on  the  part  of  the  ordained  instructors  of  the 


THE   PULPIT,  313 

people.  "  Those  men  at  Oxford,"  said  Dr.  Arnold,  on  the  first 
appearance  of  the  Tracts,  "  1  necessarily  shrink  from  them  when 
I  see  them  laboiu'ing  so  incessantly,  though  1  doubt  not  so  igno- 
rantly,  to  enthrone  the  very  mysteiy  of  falsehood  and  iniquity  in 
that  neglected  and  dishonoured  temj)le,  the  church  of  God." 
Oxford,  the  seat  of  the  pernicious  heresy,  sends  forth  her  disciples 
thoroughly  imbued  with  tractarianism,  who  find  their  way  into  the 
pulpits.  And  there  they,  in  number  and  strength  no  contemptible 
band,  advocate  sabbath  after  sabbath,  and  day  after  day,  a  theolo- 
gical system  that  is  in  direct  antagonism  with  Scripture  and  the 
evangelical  religion  of  England.  The  teaching  of  innumerable 
pulpits  in  the  church  of  Cranmer  exalts  the  church  into  the  place 
of  her  Lord,  assigns  an  efficacy  to  a  mere  ritual  which  belongs 
only  to  the  Divine  Spirit,  and  leads  men  to  rest  in  mere  outward 
observances,  instead  of  bringing  them  to  rest  exclusively  in  the 
finished  work  of  Clu-ist.  Tractarianism  indeed,  when  full  blown, 
would  throw  the  pulpit  into  the  shade,  make  the  ministers  of  reli- 
gion little  more  than  masters  of  ceremonies  ;  and,  instead  of  saying 
with  Paul,  "  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  Gos- 
pel," would  teach  each  of  them  to  say,  "  Christ  sent  me  not  to 
preach  the  Gospel,  but  to  baptize."  But  the  pulpit,  at  present, 
must  minister  to  the  forms.  Baptismal  regeneration  and  such  like 
errors  must  have  an  advocate  in  the  preacher.  The  tendency  of 
such  a  system  of  pulpit  ministration  is  at  once  to  enervate  the 
manliness  of  the  ISritish  mind,  and  obscure,  or  take  away,  that 
foundation  other  than  which  can  no  man  lay.  This  agency  is  ex- 
tensively exerted  on  thousands  of  our  countrymen  of  all  classes,  in 
a  church  which  was  one  of  the  glories  of  the  Reformation.  Its 
influence  on  many  of  our  aristocracy  has  been  made  too  obvious, 
its  influence  on  multitudes  of  humbler  parishioners  can  be  easily 
imagined,  and,  unless  checked,  it  promises  to  eat  out  the  evangeli- 
calism that  remains  in  the  Church  of  England.  Spiritual  Chris- 
tianity being  supplanted  by  this  formalism,  the  consequence  will 
be,  as  in  like  cases,  an  increase  of  indiflerentism  or  avowed  in- 
fidelity. "  If  the  Church  of  England,"  remarks  D'Aubigne,  "  were 
well  administered,  she  would  only  admit  to  her  pulpits  teachers 
who  submit  to  the  Word  of  God,  agreeably  to  the  thirty-nine 
articles,  and  banish  from  them  all  those  who  violate  her  laws,  and 
poison  the  minds  of  youth,  trouble  souls,  and  seek  to  overthrow 
the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ."- 

We  have  not  attempted  anything  like  a  full  estimate  of 
pulpit  agency.  Much,  both  of  good  and  evil  attributable  to  its 
influence,  has  necessarily  esca])ed  our  notice.  We  have  limited 
our  view  to  those  parts  of  Christendom  Avhere  the  various  forms  of 
infidelity  have  appeared  most  conspicuous.     And  without  ignoring 

*  Gauera  aud  O.vford.     By  D'Au'bigne. 


81i  THE    PULPIT. 

the  vast  amount  of  good  effected  hy  the  pulpit,  we  see  tliat  its 
agency  is  much  employed  on  the  side  of  evil.  The  office  hallowed 
by  the  labours  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  and  which  occupies 
the  foremost  place  among  tlie  means  of  promoting  religion  in  the 
world,  has  been  largely  perverted  to  the  service  of  the\dversary. 
That  agency  which  stands  apart  from  and  lifted  high  above  all 
other  agencies  by  its  sanctity,  has  often  been  degraded  to  unholy 
purposes.  And  in  the  pulpit,  the  divinely  appointed  instrument 
of  publishing  truth  and  extending  Christ's  kingdom,  all  the  forms 
of  unbelief  have  had  and  still  have  their  abettors  in  considerable 
numbers. 


In  looking  at  the  aspects,  in  tracing  the  causes,  and  in  estimating 
the  agencies  of  infidelity,  we  have  found  much  to  excite  our  fears, 
but  nothing  whatever  to  shake  our  faith.  No  one  can  view  the 
amount  of  evil  embodied  in  the  various  forms  of  unbelief,  and  the 
divers  agencies  employed  for  its  propagation,  without  a  feeling  of 
apprehension.  Infidelity  is  a  dren  that  allin-es  men  but  to  destroy 
them.  No  one,  on  the  other  hand,  can  contemplate  Christianity 
in  itself,  in  its  evidences,  in  its  past  history,  and  in  its  present 
position  and  influence,  without  lively  hope.  We  have  seen  the 
argumentative  resources  of  infidelity  to  be  miserably  weak,  but 
infidelity  itself  to  be  pliant,  active,  and  strong  for  mischief  Beaten 
though  every  form  of  it  has  been,  thousands  of  times,  in  the  field 
of  ai-gument,  it  has  had  the  daring,  a  season  after  each  defeat,  to 
reappear  in  a  somewhat  modified  form,  and  renew  the  attack.  The 
modern  assailants  of  Christianity  are  not  men  of  more  metal  than 
its  assailants  of  old  ;  and  notwithstanding  their  wily  and  insidious 
movements,  we  are  persuaded  that  they  will  be  as  thoroughly 
beaten  as  ever  their  predecessors  were.  Our  fears  are  not  for 
Christianity.  She  is  not  noiv  on  her  trial.  She  has  passed  through 
the  furnace  long  ago;  and,  in  coming  out  of  the  trial,  has  been 
powerfully  declared  to  be  heavenly  in  her  origin,  in  her  nature, 
and  in  her  aims.  The  battle  has  been  fought,  the  victory  has 
been  won.  Each  succeeding  strife  is  only  the  opening  up  of  an 
already  decided  contest,  to  be  closed  again  with  new  triumphs  to 
the  Christian  cause  More  deeply  rooted  than  ever  in  the  belief 
that  the  Gospel  of  Christ  is  of  God,  tliat  it  is  destined  to  march 
onward  among  the  nations,  and  ultimately  to  bless  all  the  families 
of  the  earth,  we  would  close  in  off"ering  up  in  the  church's  name 
the  devout  ode  which  she  offered  of  old  : — 

God  be  merciful  unto  us  anrl  bless  us;  and  cause  bis  face  to  shine  upon  us. 

TiiP.t  thy  way  may  be  known  unon  earth,  thy  saving  health  rmonif  all  nations. 

Let  the  people  praise  ihee,  0  God  ;  let  all  the  people  praise  thee. 

O  let  the  nations  be  i;lad  and  sin?  for  joy  ; 

For  thou  Flialt.judRetlie  people  riyhteously,  and  povern  the  nations  upon  earth. 

Let  the  people  praise  thee,  O  Goi]":  l^t  all  the  people  praise  thee. 

Then  shall  the  earth  yield  her  increase;  and  God,  even  onr  own  God,  shall 

bless  us. 
God  shall  bless  us  ;  and  all  the  ends  of  the  earth  shall  fear  him. 


APPENDIX. 


EEMARKS  ON  SECULAHISM.* 

Grecian  mythology  tells  us  of  a  marine  deity  whose  distinguish- 
ing characteristic  was  the  faculty  of  assuming  different  shapes, 
Proteus  was  the  very  symhol  of  infidelity.  Its  history  is  but  a 
history  of  changes.  Exceedingly  pliable  in  its  principles,  and  versa- 
tile in  its  form — passing  out  of  one  phase  into  another,  ever 
modifying  its  professions  and  changing  its  names — it  would  be 
nothing  less  than  a  libel  to  say  that  it  is  the  same  yesterday,  to- 
day, and  for  ever.  In  our  age,  the  thing  has  put  on  new  garbs, 
undergone  one  or  more  baptisms,  and  altered  its  tone.  It  is 
unstable  as  water,  it  cannot  excel.  Proteus  was,  however,  the 
same  wanton  sea-god,  under  all  the  different  shapes  which  he  had 
assimied.  And  we  detect  in  every  form  of  modern  infidelity — des- 
pite its  wonderful  pliancy  and  softened  names — the  old  enemy  of 
God's  truth  and  man's  weal. 

Since  treating  of  the  aspects  of  infidelity  in  the  preceding  essay, 
what  seems,  at  first  sight,  a  new  phase,  has  turned  up.  Undisguised 
atheism  has  failed  to  reach  the  dominion  to  which  it  aspired  among 
the  working  classes.  Thorough-going  infidel  principles,  bearing 
the  appropriate  mark,  do  not  take  nearly  so  well,  as  could  be  wished, 
with  the  public.  The  representatives  of  the  Owen  school  have  ac- 
cordingly applied  themselves  "  to  the  re-inspection  of  the  general 
field  of  controversy,"  and  the  result,  as  we  have  already  hinted,  has 
been  the  rejection  of  the  old  ill-reputed  names,  and  the  adoption  of 
the  better-looking  title — Secularism.  From  being  one  of  the  most 
intolerant,  they  are  about  to  become  the  most  tolerant  of  all  sects 
in  the  world.  They  are  "to  recognise  the  sincerity  of  the  clergy, 
and  the  good  intention  of  Christians  generally."  They  are  no 
longer  to  doubt  "  the  truthful  purpose  of  the  prophets  and  the 
apostles,  and  the  moral  excellence  of  many  passages  in  their 
writings."  The  door  is  widened  so  as  to  admit  the  "various 
classes  of  persons  known  for  their  dissent  from  the  popular  Chris- 
tian tenets  of  the  day," — these  various  classes  compreliending 
men  who  "reject  the  authority  of  miracles,"  and  "  allege  general 
objections  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible,"  as  well  as  those  who 
"  question  the  dogma  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul,"  and  "  an 
increasing  party  "  who  cannot  "subscribe  to  the  arguments  sup- 
posed   to    establish    the    existence    of    a  Being  distinct   from 

*  Chiefly  suggested  by  the  recent  London  debate. 


316  APPENDIX. 

nature."  We  cannot  conceal  our  gratification  at  these  shifts, 
symptomatic  as  they  are  of  anything  but  strength.  But  we  are 
not  to  be  imposed  upon  by  them.  Our  secularists  claim  the  right 
of  preserving  a  ''  discretionary  silence."  Tliere  would  be  little 
discretion  on  the  part  of  us  who  have  at  heart  the  best  interests  of 
the  working  classes,  did  we  not  break  silence,  and  say,  "  secularism" 
is  atheism  in  disguise — tliat-it  is  designed  to  inculcate  the  latter, 
when  the  people  are  able  to  bear  it,  secularism  in  the  meantime 
being  the  cry,  while  a  "discretionary  silence"  is  to  be  kept  in  refer- 
ence to  atheism.  The  secularist  apostle  himself  has  so  far  out' 
grown  the  common  covering,  that  he  cannot  preserve  the  "  dis- 
ci-etionary  silence,"  even  when  insisting  on  the  right  and  propriety 
of  doing  so.  "There  are  many  of  us,"  said  he,  when  lately  ex- 
pounding "secularism"  before  a  large  London  audience,  "who  trace 
all  religious  evil  to  one  root,  and  regard  '  the  belief  in  a  God  as  an 
Atlas  of  error  bearing  on  its  broad  shoulders  a  world  of  immoral- 
ities.' .  .  .  What  some  call  atheism  is  in  one  sense  suspensive 
in  secularism."  It  is  not,  then,  really  a  new  phase  of  infidelity 
but  a  compound  of  old  systems.  It  is  not  an  "  aspect "  essentially 
different  from  those  aspects  which  have  passed  under  our  review, 
bi't  inclusive  of  all  of  them  except  the  last.  Down  the  broad  way 
and  through  the  wide  gate  of  "  secularism,"  the  atheist,  the  pan- 
theist, the  rationalist,  the  spiritualist,  and  the  man  who  denies 
responsibility  —  all  may  pass,  excej^t  the  individual  who  has  the 
form  of  godliness, 

1.  A¥e  notice,  first,  the  "suspensive"  principle — the  non-belief 
in  the  existence  of  a  Supreme  13eing  distinct  from  nature.  Mr. 
Holyoake's  position  is,  "  the  nature  which  we  know  must  be  the 
Goci  which  we  seek."  "  The  wondrous  manifestations  of  nature 
indispose  liim  to  degrade  it  to  a  secondary  rank."  He  is  not  satisfied 
with  the  arguments  for  the  existence  of  a  God — they  do  not  give 
him  certainty.  We  have  here  two  questions  to  ask:  —  the  first  is, 
What  arguments  give  him  certainty  that  the  nature  which  we 
know  must  be  the  God  which  we  seek?  The  second  is.  Has  the 
mind  of  man  been  so  constituted  as  to  rest  satisfied  with  nature  for 
a  God?  A  direct  negative  must  be  given  to  both  questions.  The 
position  occu]ned  by  the  secularist  apostle  is  an  extrSmGly  absurd 
ojie.  He  demands  evidence  of  a  kind  or  degree  that  the  subject 
from  its  nature  does  not  admit.  It  is  tantamount  to  saying  "  there 
may  be  a  God,  but  no  evidence  for  his  existence  will  convince  me." 
The  only  way  to  meet  such  a  mnn  in  controversy  is  to  take  him 
u])  on  his  own  ground.  You  demand  entire  satisfaction  to  the 
intellect  before  you  will  believe  in  the  Divine  existence.  Partial 
satisfaction  to  tlie  intellect  is  all  that  is  attainable  on  the  subject. 
And  you  can  pretend  to  no  more  tlian  partial  satisfaction  in  adopt- 
ing tiie  proposition  that  the  nature  which  we  know  must  be  the^ 
God  which  we  seek.     You  renounce  the  belief  in  God  for  want  of 


APPENDIX.  317 

certainty,  and  yon  believe  in  natnre  as  occupying  the  fii-st  rank 
in  existence,  without  any  thing  deserving  the  name  of  certainty. 
But  man  has  moral  instincts  as  well  as  an  intellectual  faculty, 
and  in  the  strength  of  these  instincts  has  been  kindly  provided  a 
compensation  for  the  weakness  of  our  intellects.  These  moral 
instincts  refuse  to  rest  in  "the  nature  which  we  know,"  —  the  soul 
and  conscience  recoil  from  accepting  it  as  "  the  God  which  we 
seek."  In  other  words,  the  mind  of  man,  from  its  very  constitution, 
goes  beyond  nature,  and  demands  for  its  rest  the  existence  of  a  Su- 
preme Being  distinctfrom  nature.  The  choice  then,  on  this  ground, 
lies  between  non-belief  in  the  Divine  existence  for  want  oi^  entire 
certainty,  with  thwarting  or  repressing  the  moral  instincts;  and 
belief  in  that  existence  which  partially,  at  least,  satisfies  the  intellect, 
and  which  is  fully  demanded  by  the  heart.  The  light  of  intellect 
in  that  man  is  surely  darkness,  and  prodigious  violence  must  have 
been  done  to  the  instincts  of  his  soul  and  conscience,  who,  in 
view  of  "  the  wondrous  manifestations  of  nature,"  can  maintain 
that  nature  is  degraded  in  placing  over  it  a  creating  and  presiding 
mind !  The  top-stone  of  secularism  would  be  laid  in  material 
idolatry.  Men  will  not  suffer  "the  existence  of  Deity"  to  be 
thrust  aside  as  an  "  abstract  question,"  and  labelled  "  not  settled." 
If  men  areto  be  robbed  of  the  conception  of  an  immutably  glorious 
Being  distinct  from  nature  —  a  conception  which  "borrows  splen- 
dour fi'om  all  that  is  fair,  subordinates  to  itself  all  that  is  great, 
and  sits  enthroned  on  the  riches  of  the  universe"  —  the  substitute 
inevitably  will  be  fetichism  or  nature-worship. 

2.  The  first  fundamental  principle  of  secularism  —  a  principle 
not  "  suspensive,"  but  openly  avowed,  and  to  which  all  secularists 
must  subscribe — is.  "  that  ])recedence  should  be  given  to  the  duties 
of  this  life  over  those  which  pertain  to  anotlier  world ,"  the 
assumption  being  that  "this  life  being  the  first  in  certainty,  it 
ought  to  have  the  first  place  in  importance."  This  simply  resolves 
itself  into  the  proposition  that  the  seen  is  more  certain  than  the 
unseen,  that  what  we  know  personally  is  more  certain  than  what 
we  know  only  by  testimony,  and  the  inference  is  that  therefore  the 
former  must,  in  importance,  take  precedence  of  the  latter.  Now, 
in  the  first  place,  we  deny  that  the  seen,  strictly  speaking,  is  more 
certain  than  the  unseen ;  and.  secondly,  admitting  that  it  is  relatively 
more  certain,  it  does  not  follow  that  it  is  more  important.  It  is  not 
more  certain  that  water  always  exists  in  a  fluid  state  in  a  warm 
eastern  climate,  than  it  is  that  water  exists  as  ice  in  cold  regions, 
though  to  the  King  of  Siam  who  had  always  lived  in  a  warm 
climate,  the  one  was  more  certain  than  the  other.  Again,  the 
seen,  in  one  sense,  may  be  more  certain  than  the  unseen,  and  yet  the 
latter  may  be  the  more  important.  Relatively  to  myself  it  is 
more  certain  that  I  am  thinking  and  acting  just  now,  than  it  is 
that  I  will  be  doing  so  to-morrow,  and  yet  to-morrow,  in  the  sum 


318  APPENDIX 

of  my  thoughts  and  actions,  may  he  a  day  of  greater  importance 
in  my  histoiy  than  the  day  nov/  present.  Mathematical  truth,  in 
one  sense,  is  more  certain  than  moral  truth,  hut  no  one  will  say 
that  it  is  of  greater  impoi'tance.  In  short,  no  man  is  warranted  to 
assume  the  first  and  fundamental  position  of  seculai'ism  unless  he 
is  sure  that  there  is  no  future  life.  Our  secularists  have  no  cer- 
tainty on  this  point,  yet  they  build  their  system  on  the  supposition 
that  they  have — that  is  to  say,  they  build  upon  the  uncertain,  the 
very  ground,  as  they  allege,  on  which  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life 
stands,  and  for  which  they  ignore  or  reject  it.  The  doctrine 
itself  does  not  admit  of  demonstrative  hut  of  probable  evidence. 
Independent  of  the  Scripture  testimony,  there  are  (as  Dr.  Chalmers 
in  his  Lectures  on  Butler's  Analogy  has  remarked)  high  probabi- 
lities for  the  immortality  of  man,  founded  not  on  that  which  is  com- 
mon to  him  with  the  other  organic  creatures,  but  on  that  which 
is  peculiar  and  which  signalizes  him  from  or  above  the  others 
—  as  the  conscience  which  is  his  exclusively,  and  those  indefi- 
nite powers  and  asj)irations  which  are  his  exclusively.  These, 
which  point  man  to  a  future  life,  will  lead  him  to  believe  in  such 
a  well-attested  revelation  of  it  as  the  Gospel,  unless  the  hand  of 
violence,  thwarting  the  moral  instincts,  puts  it  away  from  him. 
Secularism  prefers  the  present  over  the  future  for  no  better  rea- 
son tban  that  it  is  present,  a  reason  repudiated  by  every  secularist 
who  takes  his  passage  to  Australia.  Some  men  who  act  ration- 
ally enough  in  the  region  of  the  material,  doff  their  rationality 
whenever  they  touch  upon  the  borders  of  the  spiritual.  Again, 
our  secularists,  on  the  supposition  of  a  future  life,  are  guilty 
of  a  fundamental  error  in  mapping  otF  the  moral  duties — saying, 
these  belong  exclusively  to  the  present,  and  those  belong  to  the 
future ;  —  they  are  chargeable  too  with  much  misrepresentation  in 
affirming  that  the  teachings  of  Christianity  make  men  indifferent  to 
the  one  and  absorb  them  in  the  other.  There  is  no  such  separation 
of  duties.  All  the  duties  of  Christianity  pertain  to  the  present  life, 
and  are  related  to  the  future  just  as  the  seed  sown  is  related  to  the 
harvest  to  be  reaped.  The  duties  of  Christianity  may  be  said  to 
be  summed  up  in  the  vrord  faith.  But,  as  has  been  well  expressed 
by  Mr.  Riddle  in  his  Bampton  Lecture,  "  the  man  who  lives  the 
life  of  faith  is  the  man  who  at  the  same  time  works  the  works  of 
God,  — works  of  integrity  and  uprightness,  —  works  of  benevolence 
and  mercy,  —  works  of  industry  and  labour,  —  works  for  the  glory  of 
God  and  for  the  welfare  of  mankind, — works  as  of  one  who  has  a 
spring  of  activity  within  him,  as  well  as  a  glorious  reward  before 
him."  "  It  is  wholly  a  mistake,"  observes  Chalmers  in  his  Prelec- 
tionsonPaley,  "that  in  a  mind  of  ordinary  soundness  the  forceof  the 
rehgious  princij)le,  even  to  the  utmost,  either  unfits  or  withdraws 
from  the  necessary  attention  we  should  give  to  the  business  of  the 
day,    and   the    accommodations  of  the  day.     .     .     .     Suppose  a 


APPENDIX.  819 

person  setting  oat  on  a  far  journey  to  a  place  where,  on  his  arrived 
he  knew  that  a  magnificent  fortune  awaited  him.  His  heart  would 
he  there.  His  thought  would  be  ever  carrying  him  forward  to 
contemplation  there,  yet  all  this  engrossment  and  hig  expectation  of 
what  lie  was  tending  to,  would  not  strip  him  of  the  necessaiy  atten- 
tion and  self-command  for  giving  the  requisite  directions  on  the 
road,  for  ordering  the  right  accommodation  at  night,  for  arranging 
a  constant  conveyance  from  one  place  to  another,  or  even  for  re- 
marking on  the  loveliness  of  the  sucessive  scenes,  and  noting  either 
the  comfort  that  gladdens  or  the  beauty  that  smiles  on  the  passing 
traveller." 

3.  A  second  avowed  principle  of  secularism  is,  that  "  science 
is  the  providence  of  man,  and  that  absolute  spiritual  dependency 
may  involve  material  destruction."  By  science  is  meant  "  those 
methodized  agencies  which  are  at  our  command — that  systematized 
knowledge  which  enables  us  to  use  the  powers  of  nature  for  human 
benefit."  By  spiritual  dependency  is  meant  "  application  to 
heaven  by  prayer,  expecting  that  help  will  come  to  us."  On  this 
platform  such  men  as  Combe,  Owen,  and  Holyoake  meet.  The 
former  part  of  the  proposition  is  a  mere  assertion  without  proof. 
The  latter  j)art  involves  a  gross  misrepresentation  of  the  scriptural 
doctrine  of  providence.  The  secularist  teacher  argues  thus  :  "  if 
the  despot  and  the  knave  accomplish  their  end  by  a  vigorous  use 
of  material  appliances,  it  is  clear  that  natural  resources  are  inde- 
pendent of  any  form  of  religious  faith,  and  the  patriot  and  the 
hoDest  man  may  hope  to  succeed  by  equal  or  gi-eater  vigour,  what- 
ever may  be  his  speculative  opinions."  It  is  not  so  clear.  The 
force  of  the  argument  is  this:  if  a  knave  uses  money  effectually 
for  accomplishing  his  bad  ends,  therefore  a  good  man  needs  no 
help  from  God  to  enable  him  to  use  it  for  good  ends.  This  is  the 
death  of  logic.  Science  and  Christianity  are  not  antagonists.  A 
vigorous  use  of  the  one  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  a  believing 
reliance  on  the  other.  A  true  science  has  made  the  most  brilliant 
progress  in  lands  the  most  illumined  with  the  liglit  of  Christianity. 
But  the  noblest  minds — minds  of  spiritual  depth  and  possessed  of 
vigorous  moral  instincts — after  having  mastered  all  known  science, 
have  felt  that  it  is  not  the  providence  of  life.  Dependence  of  a 
different  kind  is  needed  to  satisfy  the  outgoings  and  aspirations  of 
the  human  heart,  and  that  is  only  found  in  a  Divine  Providence. 
The  Providence  which  secularism  repudiates  is  7iot  the  scriptural 
doctrine,  but  a  gross  caricature  of  it.  "  Absolute  spiritual  depend- 
ency may  involve  material  destruction."  ]\lost  assuredly  it  may. 
"  It  has  a  great  tendency  to  check  human  exertion."  Most  assiu'edly 
it  has.  Let  the  mariner  ptit  to  sea  in  a  leaky  and  ill-rigged  ship, 
under  the  pretence  of  trusting  Divine  Providence,  and  the  pro- 
bability is  that  in  the  storm  his  ''absolute  spiritual  dependency" 
will  "involve  material  destruction."     It  was  absolute  spiritual  de- 


320  APPENDIX. 

pendency  which  the  tempter  wished  the  Saviour  to  exercise  when  he 
said  to  Him,  "  If  thou  be  the  Son  of  God,  cast  thyself  down  from  the 
battlement  of  the  temple  :  for  it  is  written,  He  shall  give  his  angels 
charge  concerning  thee."  But  Jesus,  who  taught  that  not  a  sparrow 
falls  without  our  heavenly  Father,  said  unto  him,  "  Thou  shalt  not 
tempt  the  Lord  thy  God."  Absolute  spiritual  dependency  is  not 
enlightened  trust,  but  impious  presumption.  The  Gospel  teaches 
no  such  doctrine.  Its  doctrine  is  not  "  pray,"  but  "  watch  and  pray." 
By  providing  a  ground  of  dependence,  and  calling  forth  a  man's  acti- 
vities, it  checks  presumption  on  the  one  hand,  and  prevents  despair 
on  tlie  other.  The  most  firm  and  enlightened  believers  in  this 
doctrine  have  been  the  men  who  have  laboured  most  for  the  good 
of  humanity.  They  have  never  felt  any  contradiction  —  and  no 
man  of  any  spiritual  discernment  and  moral  honesty  ever  can  — 
between  the  Divine  injunction  "  be  anxiously  solicitous  for  nothing," 
and  the  duty  to  guard  against  tiood  and  fire, — between  the  precept 
"lay  not  up  treasures  upon  earth,"  and  making  provision,  through 
the  savings-bank,  for  those  of  their  own  house.  It  is  here  that  we 
see  the  narrow  view,  the  little  depth,  the  irreverent  dogmatism  of 
the  secularist  philosophy.  The  amount  of  what  our  secularist 
teacher  says  is  —  'If  there  be  a  Providence,  that  Providence  would 
do  this  and  that ;  and  because  this  and  that  are  not  done,  there  is 
no  Providence.  Our  symjiathies  are  all  on  the  side  of  the  freedom 
of  Poland,  and  against  the  oppres^^ors  of  Italy ;  but  it  were  intoler- 
able presumption  and  daring  impiety  in  us,  whose  survey  is  so 
limited,  to  say,  as  the  expounder  of  secularism  has  said,  that  were 
there  a  Providence,  Poland  would  be  free,  and  Mazzini  Avould  rule 
in  Italy  to-morrow.  All  history  shows  that  national  as  well  as  in- 
dividual suffering  is  disciplinary,  that  God  is  ever  educing  good 
out  of  evil,  and  that  protracted  oppressions,  which  we  would  soon 
bring  to  an  end,  are  made  under  his  control  to  contribute  the  more 
effectually  at  last  to  the  overthrow  of  despotism  and  to  the  stability 
of  true  liberty.  Would  not  the  special  interposition  of  Providence 
that  secularism  demands  check  human  exertion  ?  It  would  as- 
suredly leave  no  room  for  the  cultivation  of  those  virtues  which 
national  struggles  call  forth,  and  which  have  made  our  own  people 
the  richest  inheritors  and  the  best  guardians  of  freedom.  Secu- 
larism stands  condemned  at  the  bar  of  the  world's  history. 

4.  The  third  avowed  principle  of  secularism  is,  "  that  there  exist, 
independently  of  scriptural  authority,  guarantees  of  morals  in 
human  nature,  intelligence,  and  utility."  Forproofsof  these  guaran- 
tees, we  have  nothing  but  assertions.  "  There  are  certainly,"  it 
is  said,  "  many  persons  who  hardly  ever  sin."  An  expression 
contrary  to  individual  experience  and  universal  observation,  and, 
even  if  true,  no  |)roof  of  the  position  itself  What  is  wanted  is 
a  broad  proof,  not  that  many  persons  hardly  ever  sin,  but  that  men 
in  general  never  sin      It  is  altogether  an  assumption — an  assump- 


APPENDIX,  $21 

tion  disowned  by  every  man  of  self-knowledge — that  human  nature 
in  the  sum  of  its  passions  and  natural  qualities  is  incorrupt  and 
undefiled,  and  that  the  corruption  manifested  is  to  be  attributed 
to  a  "  doubtfully  conditioned  state  of  society."  It  is  a  sort  of 
upside-down  logic,  a  complete  reversal  of  the  order  of  cause  and 
effect.  But  secularism  is  here  self-contradictory.  Human  nature, 
it  is  said,  is  itself  a  guarantee  of  morality.  Yet  secularists  "  do 
not  say  to  the  young,  without  qualification,  consult  your  aptitude, 
follow  your  bias ;"  for  if  that  language  were  used,  "  the  immoral 
and  unprincipled  might  victimize  their  fellows."  Now  if  it  be  not 
safe  to  follow  the  "bias,"  how  can  it  be  held  that  human  nature 
itself  is  a  guarantee  of  morality  ?  It  is  not  by  telling  us  that  men's 
Judgments  are  on  the  side  of  truth  and  justice ;  it  is  not  by  ad- 
ducing some  stray  sentiments  in  heathen  literature — some  solitary 
saying  of  Confucius,  or  some  beautiful  maxim  of  a  Persian  poet 
— that  we  are  to  be  convinced  of  the  existence  in  human  nature  of 
independent  and  sufficient  guarantees  of  morals.  No  one  denies 
the  existence  of  a  moral  sense  in  man.  But  the  question  is  not 
on  what  side  lie  the  judgments  of  conscience,  but  what  is  the 
natural  bent  of  men's  inclinations  ?     Many  an  individual  can  say 

"Video  meliora  proboque ;" 

while  the  "  Deteriora  sequor"  must  be  applied  to  his  conduct. 
Look  at  human  nature  on  a  broad  scale — on  human  nature  that 
has  been  kept  entirely  free  of  the  influences  of  Christianity — and 
ask  where  are  the  independent  guarantees  of  morality  ?  We  place 
the  wide  world  of  facts  over  against  proofless  assertions. 

Secularism  admits,  after  all,  that  "  there  is  another  order  of  j>c^. 
sons  besides  those  whose  well-balanced  feelings  incline  them  to  mo- 
rality— an  order  less  happily  constituted,  whom  error  misdirects." 
Confucius'  wonderful  saying,  at  which  our  secularist  expounder  can 
get  no  one  to  wonder  but  himself,  and  which  may  be  paralleled 
any  where  except  "in  the  Jewish  Scriptures,"  belongs  to  this  side 
of  the  account  rather  than  to  the  other.  Here  it  is,  "  alas  I  find 
no  one  who  prefers  virtue  to  personal  beauty!  "  One  thing  about 
it  is  very  wonderful,  viz.  that  it  should  be  adduced  in  proof  of 
independent  and  sufficient  guarantees  of  morality  in  human  nature. 
The  lament  of  the  "poet-moralist"  may  be  taken,  however,  as  an 
incidental  proof  of  the  secularist  admission,  that  there  exists  a 
class  of  men  whose  constitutional  tendencies  lead  them  to  error. 
These  "less  happily  constituted"  persons,  secularism  would  govern 
by  knowledge  and  put  under  the  dominion  of  ideas.  "  The  majestic 
influence  of  intelligence  rules  a  million  of  men  now,  whom  lust, 
rage,  and  rapine  would  have  ruled  in  a  former  age."  Christianity,  of 
course,  gets  no  credit  for  it.  Oh  no!  it  is  all  "independent" 
of  "  the  Jewish  Scriptures !  "  The  accomplished  mechanic,  we 
are  told,  dislikes  bad    machinery,  the  expert  builder  hatea  tb^ 

1 


322  APPENDIX. 

sight  of  an  ill-contrived  house,  the  musician  is  enraged  at  false 
notes,  and  the  true  painter  will  not  endure  a  mediocre  pictui-e. 
Knowledge  is  power:  only  put  man  under  the  dominion  of  ideas, 
and  all  his  errors  will  he  rectified  and  his  had  tendencies  checked! 
Now  this  talk,  we  submit,  is  not  to  the  point.  Christianity  seeks 
to  put  men  under  the  dominion  of  ideas.  The  Sei-mon  on  the 
Mount,  of  which  secularists  think  so  little,  and  the  Gospel  caU 
which  they  utterly  repudiate,  have  this  for  their  aim.  The  ques- 
tion is,  what  are  the  ideas  which  exert  a  regenerating  influence  on 
the  minds  of  men,  or  where,  in  the  ahsence  of  Christian  ideas 
and  influence,  do  we  find  men  exemplifying  such  conduct  in  rela- 
tion to  morals,  as  expert  builders  and  true  painters  do  in  reference 
to  science  and  art  ?  Our  secularists  would  appeal  to  the  "  artistic 
sense."  The  appeal  has  been  made  and  the  decision  given  long 
ago.  Intellectual  refinement  and  moral  viciousness  are  not  stran- 
gers to  each  other  The  age  of  Pericles  and  Alcibiades  was  a  period 
in  which  Greece  stood  at  the  highest  degree  of  intellectual  im- 
provement ;  and  "  here,"  as  Tholuck  remarks,  "  we  see  directly, 
in  the  clearest  manner,  how  little  the  mere  cultivation  of  know- 
ledge and  refined  feeling  can  benefit  man,  when  not  accompanied 
by  the  sanctification  of  the  heart."  The  light  of  purity  stands 
closely  connected  with  the  light  of  knowledge,  but  the  inference 
from  history  and  experience  is,  that  it  is  only  the  knowledge  of 
Christian  truth. 

But  "  allowing  that  some  men  and  women  are  good  by  nature, 
and  that  it  is  possible,  by  the  culture  of  the  artistic  sense,  to  control 
others  usefully,"  what  does  secularism  propose  to  do  with  those 
who  are  "  both  vicious  and  dull  ?"  The  appeal  then  is  "  to  util- 
ity, to  the  sense  of  interest."  If  you  can  make  nothing  of  the 
artistic  sense,  you  may  make  something  of  the  sense  of  profit. 
If  you  cannot  get  men  to  follow  virtue  because  of  its  native  love- 
liness, you  may  allure  them  by  a  calculating  regard  to  the  benefit 
that  arises  from  it.  This  is  the  last  resort  of  secularism.  We 
need  not  predict  its  failure.  It  is  no  new  expedient.  Men's  sense 
of  utility  has  been  appealed  to  by  social  reformers  in  all  ages. 
The  ancient  schools  appealed  to  this  as  well  as  to  the  artistic  sense, 
and  in  so  far  as  human  regeneration  was  concerned  the  appeal 
miserably  failed.  Men  are  not  led  to  practise  virtue  as  they  are 
led  to  the  market  and  the  exchange.  The  strength  of  vicious  in- 
clination can  bear  down  all  suggestions  as  to  real  and  ultimate 
profit.  Appeal  to  utility !  Carry  it  round  the  dens  of  vice  and 
intemperance,  and  it  is  withstood  by  the  preference  forthepleasm-es 
of  sin  which  are  but  for  a  season.  It  is,  at  the  best,  like  descant- 
ing to  the  poor  and  naked  of  golden  fields  at  a  distance,  while  you 
give  them  no  provisions  to  enable  them  to  prosecute  the  way. 
We  have  not  a  few  publications  of  merit  appealing  to  men's  sense 
of  utility  and  pi-udence,  but  because  the  appeal  goes  no  deeper, 


APPENDIX  323 

and  is  carried  up  do  higher,  they  have  confessedly  failed  in 
morally  elevating  the  people  for  whom  they  were  designed.  Chris- 
tianity appeals  to  utility.  It  says,  "  Godliness  is  profitable  unto 
all  things,  having  promise  of  the  life  that  now  is,  and  of  that  which 
is  to  come."  But  Christianity  has  constrained  influences,  and 
adequate  provisions,  of  which  other  systems  are  destitute.  It  has 
a  line  to  reach  the  very  lowest  depth  of  human  viciousness;  and 
in  thousands  of  cases  it  has  turned  the  will  to  choose  virtue,  brought 
the  afiections  to  delight  in  it,  and  all  the  active  powers  to  practise 
it,  where  appeals  to  the  meie  "  artistic  sense,"  or  to  the  mere  sense 
of  utility  have  left  men  depraved  and  vile.  The  gi'eat  and  good 
things  to  be  efiected  by  secularism  are  only  suspended  in  promise 
— not  so  surely  suspended  indeed  as  atheism  is  suspended  in  secu- 
larism itself — but  the  good  deeds  of  Christianity  are  broad  pal- 
pable realities,  marking  off  the  regenerated  from  the  unregenei  ated 
world.  It  is  only  in  proportion  as  the  race  of  man  is  leaven  mi  by 
it,  that  we  find  guarantees  in  human  nature  for  morality,  that  a 
true  culture  is  promoted,  and  that  the  lovely  and  the  useful  meet 
together.  This  is  no  mere  assertion.  We  appeal  to  the  out-lying 
world  for  proof. 


INDEX. 


Addison,  his  opinion  of  atheists,  7. 

Arnold,  Dr.,  his  opinion  of  atheism,  7  ; 
extract  from  his  life,  23 ;  on  the 
moral  fault  of  unbplief,  174;  on  so- 
cial disaffection,  202;  his  influence 
on  education,  288;  on  the  Oxford 
Tractarians,  313. 

Atheism,  its  characteristics,  G;  its 
existence  doubted,  7 ;  no  man  of 
straw,  ib  ;  its  prevalence  in  France, 
8;  the  worst  form  of  infidelity,  11  ; 
character  of  among  the  people,  12; 
a  negation  incapable  of  proof,  12 — 15. 
Atonement,  doctrine  of  the,  misrepre- 
sented, 97,  103,  107,  127. 

Bacon,  Lord,  his  opinion  of  atheism,  7. 

Bailey's  "  Festus,"  its  bad  theo- 
logy, 41,  139. 

Baird.  Dr.,  on  American  unitarianism, 
90,  n. 

Bible,  claims  of  the,  76  ;  treatment  of, 
by  modern  rationalists,  88. 

Bolingbroke,  Lord,  on  the  doctrine  of 
atonement,  127. 

Bost,  M.,  on  the  schools  of  Geneva, 
299,  n. 

Brougham,  Lord,  on  the  "  Sj-steme  de 
la  Nature,"  8;  on  the  design  argu- 
ment, 20  ;  on  non-responsibility,  140. 


Carlyle,  religious  bearing  of  his  writ- 
ings, 37  ;  idealism  of,  197  ;  his  in- 
fluence injurious,  257. 

Chalmers,  Dr.,  his  opinion  of  d'Hol- 
bach's  work,  9 ;  on  the  theology  of 
'ion science,  21 ;  on  the  development 
theor}-,  58  ;  on  the  astronomical 
objection,  81  ;  on  intolerant  pro- 
fessors, 233  ;  on  a  Christianized  uni- 
'irsity,  300. 


Cheap  literature,  classification  of,  265. 

Christianitv,    a   second   creation,   68; 

distinguished     by    simplicity    and 

spiritualit3%  162  ;  based  on  evidence, 

and  why,.  176. 

Christian  Times,  on   the  penny  press, 

267,  n. 
Church  of  Christ,  its  disunion  an  oc- 
casion of  infidelity,  237 ;   is   really 
one,  ib. 
Clubs,  as  an  agency  of  infidelity,  273; 
a  characteristic  of  the  age,  ib. ;  the 
principle  of,  employed  for  good,  274 ; 
irreligious  character  of  many,  275; 
political   and   socialist,   276 ;  infidel 
character  of  French, ib. ;  their  spread 
on  the  continent,  278  ;  secret,  279,n. ; 
use  made  of   workmen's,  280 ;   fo- 
reigners', in  London,  282 ;  counter- 
active agencies,  ib. 
Coleridge,  extract  from,  42 ;  his  opi- 
nion of  unitarianism,  89. 
Combe,  character  of  his  "  Constitution 
of  Man,"  61 ;  his  notions  of  Provi- 
dence, 64  ;  of  prayer,  ib. ;  disastrous 
influence  of  his  writings,  259. 
Comte,  Auguste,  huge  materialism  of 
his  system,  9 ;  denies  a  Divine  Pro- 
vidence, 52  ;  his  system  of  worship, 
54,  n.  X 
Corruptions  of  Christianity,  an  occasion 
of  infidelity,  209  ;  their  sources,  ib. ; 
not  to  be  confounded  with  itself,  2 10  ; 
various  forms  of,  213  ;  produce  aver- 
sion to   Christianity,  215;     expose 
the  people  to  infidel  leaders,  220 ; 
supply   weapons   to    attack   Chris- 
tianity, 221. 
Cousin,  his  pantheistic  leanings,  32 ; 

extract  from,  ib.  n.  J 
Cowper,  on  the  Christian's  enjoyment, 


325 


136  ;■  on  geology,  228  ;  on  the  press, 

253;  on  the  pulpit,  302, 
Chambers'      Journal,     character     of, 

272. 
Creation,  pantheistic  notions  of,  40. 

D'Aubigne's  "  History  of  the  Reforma- 
tion," 5i;  on  modern  spiritualism. 
117,  n. ;  on  the  ecclesiastical  theory, 
164,172. 

Development  Hypothesis,  Hugh  Mil 

ler's  opinion    of,   11,59;  theory  of, 
'57;    Oken   on,    ib. ;    testimony     of 
geology  against,  58. 

D'llolbach,  Baron,  atheism  of,  8. 

Disunion  of  the  Church,  a  popular 
argument  against  the  gospel,  238. 

Divine  Influence  indispensably  neces- 
sary, 128;  admitted  by  Seneca  and 
■  Plato,  129;  does  not  interfere  with 
moral  freedom,  ib. ;  testimonies  to 
its  reality,  131. 

Doctrines  of  religion,  5. 

Dumas,  M.,  character  of  his  writings, 
262. 

"Eclipse  of  Faith  "  on  modern  spiri- 
tualism, 110,  121,  n. 

Emerson,  a  pantheist,  34  ;  a  dreamer, 
35  ;  his  notions  of  moral  evil,  41. 

Evidence.  Chrl-itianity  founded  on,  and 
why,  176  ;  not  irresistible,  ib. 

Existence,  the  Divine,  nature  of  the 
arguments  for,  16,  &c. ;  indications 
of,  in  the  material  universe,  18;  in 
the  human  mind,  19;  the  testimony 
of  the  Bible,  22  ;  the  practical  proof, 
23;  does  not  admit  of  demonstrative 
but  of  moral  certainty,  174. 

Family  Herald,  character  of,  267,  268. 

Feuerbach,  his  pantheistic  opinions,  33. 

Fichte,  his  pantheism,  30. 

Formalism,  infidelity  in  practice,  156  ; 
its  nature,  157;  prevalency,  ib.  ; 
phih)Sophy  of,  158 ;  of  the  ancient 
heathens,  159;  of  man}'  men  of 
science,  ib. ;  of  the  ancient  Hebrews, 
161  ;  its  appearance  in  the  early 
Christian  church,  162  ;  of  the  Romish 
Church,  163  ;  of  the  Tractarians, 
164;  not  peculiar  to  any  system, 
ib. ;  utterly  worthless,  165;  desti- 
tute of  real  happiness,  167  ;  tends  to 


intolerance,  169;  diametrically  op- 
posed to  the  gospel,  171 ;  D'Aubigne 
on,  172. 
Foster,  John,  on  atheism,  14 ;  on  na- 
turalism, 51  ;  on  formalism,  160  ;  on 
socialist  publications,  263. 

Garbett,  Professor,  on  the  Personality 
of  God,  39,  45,  47. 

Geology,  opposed  to  the  development 
hypothesis,  58,  82  ;  evidence  of,  in 
harmony  with  Scripture,  228. 

Germany,  prevalence  of  pantheism  in, 
28;  its  rationalism,  68. 

God,  existence  of,  an  intellectual  ne- 
cessity, 14. 

Hampden,  Dr.,  on  the  influence  of 
Platonism,  185  ;  on  the  scholastic 
philosophy,  186. 

Harris,  Dr.,  quotations  from  his  "Pre- 
Adamite  Earth,"  15,  81. 

Hegel,  pantheism  of,  30,  195 ;  influ- 
ence of  in  German}',  296. 

Humboldt,  naturalism  of  his  "Cosmos," 
60 

Hume,  fallacy  of  his  reasoning,  72. 

Ideal  Philosophv,  its  character  and  in- 
fluence, 192;' German,  193;  Leib- 
nitz, Wolf,  Kant,  Hegel,  Strauss, 
193—195;  its  influence  on  English 
literature,  196. 

Immortality,  individual,  lost  in  pan- 
theism, 43. 

Indifferentism,  a  diluted  kind  of  scep- 
ticism, 136;  Dr.  Krummacher's  re- 
marks on,  137;  in  the  continental 
churches,  138  ;  prevalency  of  in 
our  own  literature,  139:  implies  a 
weakened  sense  or  an  actual  denial 
of  responsibility,  137,  140  ;  see 
"  Respon-ibilit}',  Moral." 

Infidelity,  a  S3'stem  of  negations,  5; 
its  various  forms,  5;  atheism, 6;  pan- 
theism, 23;  naturalism,  48;  spiri- 
tualism, 88:  indifl'erentisra,  136; 
formalism,  156. 

,  causes  of,  173  ;  moral  rather 

than  intellectual,  ib. ;  s[ieculative 
philosoph}',  182;  social  disaflfection, 
199;  corruptions  of  Christianity, 
209;  religious  intolerance,  222;  dis- 
union of  the  church,  237. 


326 


Infidelity,  its  agencies,  251 ;  the  press, 
252;  the  clubs,  273;  the  schools, 
286;  the  pulpit,  300. 

Intolerance,  much,  without  the  church, 
222 ;  not  chargeable  on  Christianity, 
223;  religious,  the  worst,  235. 

Kant,  principle  of  his  philosophy,  194. 
Krumraacher,  Dr.,  on  atheism,  12,  n. ; 

account  of   indifFerentism,  137 ;    on 

pedagogy,  295,  n. 

Laplace,  his  hypothesis,  18. 

Lewes,  his  "Biographical  History  of 

Philosophy,"  54. 
Locke,  use  made  of  his  metaphysics, 

188. 

Macaulay,  remark  of,  on  popery,  217  ; 
his  review  of  Gladstone's  "  Church 
and  State,"  245. 

Mackay,  his  notion  of  prayer,  65  ;  his 
idea  of  the  origin  of  Messiah,  85, 
n.  f;  his  "Progress  of  the  Intel- 
lect," character  of  this  book,  104 ; 
examination  of  his  assertions,  ib.  > 
&c. ;  his  scripture  references,  107, 
n. ;  guilty  of  deception,  109. 

Mayhew,  Mr.,  on  the  literature  of  the 
masses,  266  ;  on  the  state  of  the 
costermongers,  274,  n. 

Miller,  Hugh,  on  development,  11 ; 
quotations  from  his  *'  Footprints," 
59. 

Miracles,  Strauss  on,  69,  &c. ;  New- 
man's remark,  69  ;  true  doctrine  of,  7 1. 

Moral  Argument  of  Spiritualism,  ex- 
amined, 117;  unsupported  by  an- 
alogy, 119;  one-sided,  121;  human 
depravity  matter  of  experience,  123 ; 
pardon  on  the  ground  of  atonement 
not  unreasonable,  125  ;  spiritual  re- 
generation a  reasonable  doctrine, 
128  ;  charge  of  gloominess  unfound- 
ed, i43. 

Moral  Distinctions,  destroyed  by  pan- 
theism, 41. 

Morell,  on  the  argument  from  design, 
21  ;  on  the  views  of  Cousin,  32;  on 
secondary  agencies,  64;  his  theory 
of  inspiration,  77;  failure  of  his 
rhargt'S  against  special  inspiration, 
79  ;  tendency  of  his  speculations,  109, 
&c. ;  on  Romish  fellowship,  163;  on 


the  process  of  Sensationalism,  1 90  ; 
on  the  ideal  philosophy,  196,  197. 
Mystery,  inseparable  from  God's  works, 
87 ;    in   nature    and  in  revelation, 
123. 

Naturalism,  distinctive  characteristic 
of,  48 ;  no  novelty,  51 ;  works  on  phy- 
sical and  moral  science  in  which  it  is 
manifested,  52,  68  ;  its  elFecton  Bible 
theology,  68  ;  interdicts  Divine  Pro- 
vidence, ib.  ;  denies  inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures,  74 ;  remarks  on  the 
theory  of,  80;  based  on  false  analogy, 
ib. ;  is  chargeable  with  anthropomor- 
phism, 81  ;  opposed  to  the  evidence 
of  geology,  82  ;  assigns  no  adequate 
cause  for  Christianity,  84 ;  opposed  to 
the  religion  of  the  Bible,  86;  most 
unnatural,  87 ;  its  argumentative 
weakness,  175. 

Nebular  hypothesis,  Whewell  on,  56. 

Newman,  Dr.,  on  miracles,  69. 

,F.  VV.,  his  "Phases  of  Faith," 

98;  character  and  analysis  of  this 
book, 99,  &c.;  his  progress  in  unbelief, 
ib.;  on  the  character  of  Christ,  102; 
his  unfairness,  103. 

Newton,  Sir  Isaac,  his  testimony  to  a 
Divine  Providence,  53. 

Oken,  Professor,  on  development,  57. 
Owen  School,  philosophy  of,  65;  shal- 
lowness of,  66. 

Paley,  Dr.,  on  natural  laws,  57. 

Pantheism,  distinguished  from  athe- 
ism, 23;  its  real  character,  24; 
dangerous  to  Christianity,  26 ;  an 
ancient  error,  27  ;  its  prevalence  in 
Germany,  28  ;  progress  of,  29  ;  the 
faith  of  many  Frenchmen,  32  ;  the 
element  of  continental  socialism,  33  ; 
an  exotic  in  England,  ib. ;  bearings 
of,  40-44. 

Parker,  Theodore,  extract  from,  42  ; 
deiionncf  s  the  Old  Unitarian  School, 
89, 190  ;  his  theological  opinions,  92  ; 
fallacy  of  his  theory,  95  ;  unfairness 
of  his  representations,  97. 

Personality  of  God,  Prof.  Garbett  on, 
39  ;  proofs  of,  44—46  ;  more  rational 
than  pantheism,  174. 

Philosophy,  not  opposed  to  faith,  199. 


827 


Philosophy,  Speculative,  an  occasion 
of  infidelity,  182  ;  its  rise  inevitable, 
and  marks  progress,  ib. ;  has  ever 
tampered  with  Christian  truth,  183; 
gnosticism,  Origen,  platonism,  phi- 
losophy of  Aristotle,  183—187  ;  sen- 
sationaiiiim  and  idealism,  188.  See 
"  Sensational  Philosophy,"  "  Ideal 
Philosophy." 

Phrenolog3\  does  not  affect  human 
liberty,  151  ;  case  of  Alexander  VI., 
152. 

Prayer,  shut  out  by  pantheism,  42 ; 
Combe's  view  of,  64;  Mackay's 
notion  of,  65. 

Press,  The,  a  powerful  agent,  252  ;  its 
beneficent  doings,  253;  powerfully 
employed  on  the  side  of  infidelity, 
254 ;  character  of,  in  Germany,  256  ; 
immense  power  of  the  periodical, 
260  ;  the  periodical,  greater  for  evil 
than  for  good,  261;  character  of 
in  France,  2€2  ;  statistics  of,  263; 
signs  of  improvement,  270 ;  appeal  to 
the  church,  272. 

Providence,  Divine,  denial  of,  in- 
creases difficulties,  62  ;  instance  from 
Combe,  64;  denied  by  rationalists, 
68. 

Pulpit,  The,  state  of,  a  criterion  of  the 
state  of  religion,  300;  at  one  time 
almost  the  only  means  of  instruction, 
301;  main  instrument  of  propa- 
gating religious  truth,  ib. ;  is  exten- 
sively employed  for  evil,  302  ;  state 
of,  in  Germany,  ib.;  state  of,  in 
Hungary,  306  ;  in  Switzerland,  ib. ; 
in  Holland,  307  ;  in  Belgium,  308  ;  in 
France,  ib. ;  in  our  own  country,  311. 

Rationalists,  dishonesty  of,  75. 

Religious  Intolerance,  a  cause  of  infi- 
delity, 222 ;  not  chargeable  on 
Christianity,  223  ;  1st  form  of,  jea- 
lousy in  reference  to  science,  225 ; 
2nd  form  of,  jealousy  in  reference 
to  accommodation  in  preaching,  230  ; 
3rd  form  of,  intolerance  of  different 
rites  and  ceremo^iies,  234;  Isaac  Tay- 
lor on,  236  ;  Vinet  on,  ib. 

Responsibility,  Moral,  matter  of 
consciousness,  141  ;  rests  on  free 
agency,  144;  is  measured  by  privi- 
lege, 148;   indestructible  amid  all 


objections,  150  ;  essential  to  human 
improvement,  153  ;  Taylor  on,  154. 

"Restoration  of^  Belief,"  extract  from, 
36,  n.  t ;  94,  n.  f 

Robinson,  Dr..  on  the  influence  of  Ge- 
senius,  296,  n.  ;  on  examinations  for 
the  pastoral  office  in  Germany,  305, 
n.  t 

Rogers,  Mr.  Henry,  his  opinion  of  the 
Straussian  theory,  85 ;  on  the  fathers, 
86,  n.;  on  modern  infidel  writers,  258. 

Ruskin,  Mr.,  on  unity  of  the  church, 
243,  n. 

Schelling,  pantheism  of,  30. 

Schools,  an  agency  of  infidelity,  286; 
attention  now  given  to,  287  ;  infla 
ence  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  288; 
the  northern,  293;  of  France,  294. 
of  Germany,  295  ;  of  Holland,  297; 
Geneva,  298. 

Sectarianism,  the  bane  of  the  church, 
248. 

Secularism,  its  real  nature,  281;  re- 
marks on,  315. 

Sensational  Philosophy,  its  influence, 
188;  its  evil  effect  on  science  and 
literature,  190  ;  in  France,  191. 

Smith  on  Pantheism,  26,  27. 

Smith,  Dr.  Pye,  his  "  Scripture  and 
Geology"  referred  to,  226,  229. 

Social  disaffection,  an  occasion  of  infi- 
delity, 199;  agitation  not  always  an 
evil,  ib. ;  when  injurious,  200  ;  causes 
of,  201 ;  leads  to  visionary  theories, 
203;  employs  infidelity,  208. 

Socialism,  Mill  on,  202 ;  a  religion  ot 
political  liberty,  203;  "Daily  News" 
on,  204;  ignores  three  palpable  facta, 
ib. ;  seeks  identity  with  Christianity, 
205  ;  its  tendency  to  pantheism,  206 

Spinoza,  the  father  of  modern  pan- 
theism, 29. 

Spiritualism,  the  denial  of  redemption, 
88 ;  its  mode  of  explaining  Bible 
doctrines,  89 ;  ftxllacy  of  its  theory, 
95  ;  see  "  Moral  Argument.'" 

Strauss,  his  opinions,  31 ;  on  miracles, 
69,  &c. ;  his  convenient  morality, 
304,  n.  t 

Superstition,  connected  with  unbeliei, 
212. 

"  Syst^me  de  la  Nature,"  an  atheistical 
work,  8  ;  Chalmerg'  opinion  of,  9. 


.3-38 


Taylor,  Isaac,  quotation  from,  126  ;  on 

human  responsibility,  154 ;  on  Trac- 

tarianism,  164. 
Tennyson,  quotation  from  his  "  In  Me- 

moriam,"  40. 
Tholuck,  on  Divine  influence,  13 Ij  on 

the  Continental  universities,  297,  n. 
Tractariaus,   their   use  of   the   Press, 

259. 

Unbelief,  moral  fault  of,  174;  not  from 
want  of  evidence,  177  ;  arises  from 
aversion  to  holiness,  179;  Plutarch 
on,  212. 

Unitarianism,  Coleridge's  opinion  of, 
89;Parkei-'s  opinion  of,ib.n.+  ;chang- 
ing  its  ground,  90 ;  opinion  of  a  French 
Encyclopsedist,  91  ;  rapidly  merging 
in  infidelity,  92. 

Unity,  not  uniformity,  242  ;  false  pre- 
tences of  Popery  to,  ib. ;  VVhately 
on,  ib. ;  Sir  James  Stephen  on, 
243.  216;  Ruskin  on,  243,  n,  ; 
Voltaire  on,  244 ;  Gladstone  on,  245  ; 


advantages   of,  246  ;    noble  things 
eflFected  by,  249. 
Universities,  The,  influence  of,  289  ; 
see  "•  Schools." 

Vaughan,  Dr.,  on  spiritualism,    102, 

130. 
"Vestiges  of  the  Natural  History  of 

Creation,"  character  of,  55. 
Voltaire,  his  objection  to  Christianity 

for  want  of  uniformity,  244. 

Wardlaw,  Dr.,  on  miracles,  72. 
VVestcott's  •'  Elements  of  the  Gospel 

Harmony,"  quotation  from,  76. 
Whately,  Archbishop,  on  unity  of  the 

church,  242  ;  on  the  Tractarians,  213; 
VVhewell,   Professor,   on  atheism,  15. 

on  the  Divine  Existence,  18  ;  on  the 

nebular  hypothesis,  56. 
Will,  Tiie  Human,  has  much  to  do  with 

infidelity,  173,  &c. 
Working  Class,    necessity  of    special 

agency  for,  284. 


Partridge,  Oakey,  &  Co.,  Printers,  Paddington. 


1    1012  01010  4901 


